MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1996294777 · doi:10.1021/es403170f

Bioconcentration of Aqueous Film-Forming Foam (AFFF) in Juvenile Rainbow Trout (<i>Oncorhyncus mykiss</i>)

2013· article· en· W1996294777 on OpenAlexaff
Leo W. Y. Yeung, Scott A. Mabury

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRainbow troutBioconcentrationAqueous solutionJuvenileChemistryEnvironmental chemistryFish <Actinopterygii>FisheryBioaccumulationEcologyBiologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work investigated the bioconcentration of PFASs in juvenile rainbow trout by exposing the fish in separate tanks under flow-through conditions to water continuously spiked with either of the AFFFs FC-203CF light water AFFF 3% (3M) or Niagara 1-3 (Angus Fire); a nonspiked tank served as the control. Three fish in each tank were collected after 1, 3, 6, and 11 days of exposure, and 3, 7, 14, and 25 days of depuration. Liver and carcass homogenate samples were analyzed for 20 PFASs using LC-MS/MS. PFDS, PFOS, PFHxS, and EtFOSAA were detected in fish exposed to the 3M foam, while 6:2 and 8:2 FTSASs, 6:2 and 8:2 FTSAs, 5:3 and 7:3 FTCAs were measured in fish exposed to Angus Fire foam. Bioconcentration factors and rate constants for uptake and depuration were calculated. Total and extractable organofluorine were measured in the fish samples. After fish were exposed to AFFFs, not only known PFASs but also other unknown organofluorines were bioconcentrated. Compared to the control group, significantly greater amounts (at least 10-fold) and proportion of unidentified PFASs were found in both liver and carcass homogenate ranging from ∼50% in 3M foam up to 95% in the Angus Fire foam at the end of exposure.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations65
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicPer- and polyfluoroalkyl substances researchFrench-language works237,207