PCBs in Dungeness Crab Reflect Distinct Source Fingerprints among Harbor/Industrial Sites in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dungeness crab (Cancer magister) samples were collected from various pulp mill and principal harbor sites on the West Coast of Canada. Full congener PCB analysis was performed on several composite and single hepatopancreas samples from each site, and the spatial variability of PCB patterns was explored. A recently developed direct mixing model (DMM) which relies on iteration of representative Aroclor end-members was used to make source predictions based on congener-specific PCB data from biota. Additionally, factor analysis and principal component analysis (FA/PCA) were applied to examine the intersite variability for potential PCB-source patterns. This unsupervised exploratory analysis (i.e., FA/PCA) revealed three distinct clusters of variables containing either low (di-tetra), moderate (penta-hexa), and high (hepta-nona) levels of chlorination, which were related to common Aroclor mixtures (e.g., A1242, A1248, A1254, and A1260). Overall, the PCA scores for each site qualitatively agreed with the source predictions provided by the DMM, and distinct source compositions were predicted for various sites examined.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".