MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000965229 · doi:10.2320/matertrans.44.1877

Field Study on Heavy Metal Accumulation in a Natural Wetland Receiving Acid Mine Drainage

2003· article· en· W2000965229 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Keiko Sasaki, Tagiru Ogino, Yuji Endo, Kunihiko Kurosawa

Bibliographic record

VenueMATERIALS TRANSACTIONS · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMine drainage and remediation techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Society for the Promotion of ScienceUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsWetlandAcid mine drainageEnvironmental remediationEnvironmental chemistryMetalDrainageEnvironmental scienceMetal ions in aqueous solutionSurface waterEnvironmental engineeringContaminationChemistryMaterials scienceMetallurgyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mechanism of surface water remediation in a natural wetland that is receiving heavy metal-rich acidic mine drainage was investigated. Selective sequential extraction was useful to derive the mechanisms of heavy metal removal in the wetland. In the upstream portion of the wetland, dissolved Fe was removed mainly as oxide-bounded mineral phases, such as hydroxides. These are important for the subsequent removal of other heavy metals. Other ion-exchangeable and carbonate-bounded heavy metals are also observed in the upstream, associated with Fe oxides. Organic matter and Fe–Mn oxides in the upstream remove Cu and Zn ions from the drainage, respectively. In the middle of portion of the wetland the removal of heavy metal ions in relatively low concentrations occurs by the emergent vegetation. Greater clay abundance and higher microbial activity of sulfate reducing bacteria in the downstream parts achieved low-level removal of metals. Multi-cell wetlands are recommended for the treatment of acidic metal bearing surface water drainage, if sufficient land area and expenses are available to construct.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations19
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMATERIALS TRANSACTIONSSame topicMine drainage and remediation techniquesFrench-language works237,207