Toxicity of Naphthenic Acids to Wood Frog Tadpoles (<i>Lithobates sylvaticus</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Increased incidences of mortality and adverse effects have been described for wildlife exposed to oil-sands-process-affected waters (OSPW). Naphthenic acids (NA) were identified as a primary toxic component of OSPW, yet little information exists regarding NA-induced toxicity in aquatic vertebrates. Amphibian larvae may be particularly susceptible to exposure to OSPW in groundwater surrounding oil sands regions, and increased frequency of mortality and adverse developmental effects were noted in exposed tadpoles. Despite this, there are no published studies investigating the effects of NA exposure on developing tadpoles. LC50 values of 4.76 mg/L NA were found for tadpoles at an early developmental stage (Gosner stage 28), and even greater toxicity with more developed tadpoles at 96 h, with an LC50 value of 3.04 mg/L in Gosner stage 36 tadpoles. These values are well below NA concentrations found in OSPW tailing ponds and similar to levels identified in groundwater in the Athabasca Oil Sands region.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".