MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004719821 · doi:10.1021/es035288h

Temporal Trends and Spatial Distributions of Brominated Flame Retardants in Archived Fishes from the Great Lakes

2004· article· en· W2004719821 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ling Yan Zhu, Ronald A. Hites

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsTroutPolybrominated diphenyl ethersEnvironmental sciencePolybrominated BiphenylsPolychlorinated biphenylFish <Actinopterygii>Fire retardantBiphenylEnvironmental chemistryFisheryEcologyPollutantBiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To explore the geographical distribution and temporal trends of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) in the Great Lakes, lake trout from Lakes Superior, Michigan, Huron, and Ontario and walleye from Lake Erie, collected during the period of 1980-2000, were analyzed. The concentrations of fifteen PBDE congeners and one polybrominated biphenyl (PBB-153) were determined in each fish sample. Lake trout from Lakes Michigan and Ontario had the highest sigmaPBDE concentrations during the years investigated. The sigmaPBDE concentrations in fishes from the five lakes increased exponentially with time, doubling every 3-4 years. The relative proportion of BDEs-47, -99, and -100 compared to BDEs-153 and -154 increased significantly as a function of time. Over the period 1980-2000, the concentrations of PBB-153, which was a component of a flame retardant banned in the 1970s, generally remained the same in these Great Lakes fishes, except for lake trout from Lake Huron, where the PBB-153 concentrations decreased significantly, but slowly.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.928
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations166
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicToxic Organic Pollutants ImpactFrench-language works237,207