Biomagnification of Perfluorinated Compounds in a Remote Terrestrial Food Chain: Lichen–Caribou–Wolf
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The biomagnification behavior of perfluorinated carboxylates (PFCAs) and perfluorinated sulfonates (PFSAs) was studied in terrestrial food webs consisting of lichen and plants, caribou, and wolves from two remote northern areas in Canada. Six PFCAs with eight to thirteen carbons and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) were regularly detected in all species. Lowest concentrations were found for vegetation (0.02-0.26 ng/g wet weight (ww) sum (Σ) PFCAs and 0.002-0.038 ng/g ww PFOS). Wolf liver showed highest concentrations (10-18 ng/g ww ΣPFCAs and 1.4-1.7 ng/g ww PFOS) followed by caribou liver (6-10 ng/g ww ΣPFCAs and 0.7-2.2 ng/g ww PFOS). Biomagnification factors were highly tissue and substance specific. Therefore, individual whole body concentrations were calculated and used for biomagnification and trophic magnification assessment. Trophic magnification factors (TMF) were highest for PFCAs with nine to eleven carbons (TMF = 2.2-2.9) as well as PFOS (TMF = 2.3-2.6) and all but perfluorooctanoate were significantly biomagnified. The relationship of PFCA and PFSA TMFs with the chain length in the terrestrial food chain was similar to previous studies for Arctic marine mammal food web, but the absolute values of TMFs were around two times lower for this study than in the marine environment. This study demonstrates that challenges remain for applying the TMF approach to studies of biomagnification of PFCAs and PFSAs, especially for terrestrial animals.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".