Biofouling Growth in Cold Estuarine Waters and Evaluation of Some Chitosan and Copper Anti-Fouling Paints
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ecological concerns about antifouling paints containing non-green tin and copper compounds have highlighted the need for environmentally friendly alternatives. We report here a field test conducted in estuarine waters over two months designed to evaluate the efficiency of a number of active natural and man-made chemical ingredients added into a silicon-polyurethane marine paint. Early steps of biofouling in cold seawater of the St. Lawrence Estuary (Canada) were observed. Analyses, including dry biomass, flow cytometry and spectrofluorimetry, demonstrated a short-term antibacterial action of chitosan-based paints although no significant anti-algal action was observed. Cuprous oxide paints were efficient against bacteria and algae invasion in the first two weeks, especially those with added organic biocides such as isothiazolone and copper pyrithione. However, the overall dry biomass and chlorophyll a content were similar for all chitosan-and copper-based paints after 63 days. Microscopic observations revealed variation in the highly diverse benthic diatom population including species Navicula, Melosira, Cocconeis, Nitshzcia, Fragilaria and Amphora. Results suggest no real long-term efficiency for tested antifouling paints and highlight a particular need for green antifouling ingredients that are active under northern estuarine conditions.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".