An evaluation of 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid in the Amphibian Metamorphosis Assay and the Fish Short-Term Reproduction Assay
Bibliographic record
Abstract
2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) was evaluated in both the Amphibian Metamorphosis Assay (AMA) and the Fish Short Term Reproduction Assay (FSTRA). In the AMA, tadpoles were exposed to mean measured 2,4-D concentrations of 0 (water control), 0.273, 3.24, 38.0 and 113 mg acid equivalents (ae)/L for either seven or 21 days. In the FSTRA, fathead minnows were exposed to mean measured 2,4-D concentrations of 0 (water control), 0.245, 3.14, 34.0, and 96.5 mg ae/L for 21 days. The respective concentrations of 2,4-D were not overtly toxic to either Xenopus laevis tadpoles or fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas). In the AMA, there were no signs of either advanced or delayed development, asynchronous development, or significant histopathological effects of the thyroid gland among 2,4-D exposed tadpoles evaluated on either day seven or day 21 of the exposure. Therefore, following the AMA decision logic, 2,4-D is considered "likely thyroid inactive" in the AMA with a No Observable Effect Concentration (NOEC) of 113 mg ae 2,4-D/L. In the FSTRA, there were no significant differences between control and 2,4-D exposed fish in regard to fertility, wet weight, length, gonado-somatic indices, tubercle scores, or blood plasma concentrations of vitellogenin. Furthermore, there were no treatment-related histopathologic changes in the testes or ovaries in any 2,4-D exposed group. The only significant effect was a decrease in fecundity among fish exposed to 96.5 mg ae 2,4-D/L. The cause of the reduced fecundity at the highest concentration of 2,4-D tested in the assay was most likely due to a generalized stress response in the fish, and not due to a specific endocrine mode of action of 2,4-D. Based on fish reproduction, the NOEC in the FSTRA was 34.0 mg ae 2,4-D/L.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".