MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990012558 · doi:10.1002/etc.352

Toxicity of petroleum hydrocarbon distillates to soil organisms

2010· article· en· W1990012558 on OpenAlexaffabout
Janet Cermak, Gladys L. Stephenson, Detlef Birkholz, Zhendi Wang, D. George Dixon

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Toxicology and Chemistry · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPesticide and Herbicide Environmental Studies
Canadian institutionsStantec (Canada)University of WaterlooEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistillationToxicityEnvironmental chemistryPetroleumEnvironmental scienceChemistryEcotoxicologyToxicologyBiologyChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canadian standards for petroleum hydrocarbons in soil are based on four distillate ranges (F1, C6-C10; F2, >C10-C16; F3, >C16-C34; and F4, >C34). Concerns have arisen that the ecological soil contact standards for F3 may be overly conservative. Oil distillates were prepared and characterized, and the toxicity of F3 and two subfractions, F3a (>C16-C23) and F3b (>C23-C34), to earthworms (Eisenia andrei), springtails (Orthonychiurus folsomi), and northern wheatgrass (Elymus lanceolatus), as well as the toxicity of F2 to earthworms, was determined. Clean soil was spiked with individual distillates and measured concentrations were determined for select tests. Results agree with previous studies with these distillates. Reported toxicities of crude and petroleum products to invertebrates were generally comparable to that of F3 and F3a. The decreasing order of toxicity was F3a > F3 > F3b with invertebrates, and F3a > F3b > F3 with plants. The toxicities of F3a and F3b were not sufficiently different to recommend regulating hydrocarbons based on these distillate ranges. The results also suggest that test durations may be insufficient for determining toxicity of higher distillate ranges, and that the selection of species and endpoints may significantly affect interpretation of toxicity test results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.113
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.003
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Toxicology and ChemistrySame topicPesticide and Herbicide Environmental StudiesFrench-language works237,207