MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2009141346 · doi:10.7202/1027672ar

Évolution temporelle des concentrations de mercure dans les plumes d’oiseaux de proie au Québec

2014· article· fr· W2009141346 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Louise Champoux, Jean‐Paul Rodrigue, Guy Fitzgérald, François Bilodeau

Bibliographic record

VenueLe Naturaliste canadien · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsGDG Environnement
FundersUniversité de MontréalParks CanadaMcGill UniversityUniversité Laval
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Des analyses de mercure ont été effectuées sur des plumes de 7 espèces d’oiseaux de proie récoltées au Québec entre les années 1906 à 2002. Une diminution temporelle des concentrations a été observée chez les aigles royaux et les autours des palombes. Chez les jeunes balbuzards pêcheurs élevés à proximité des réservoirs hydroélectriques, une diminution des concentrations de mercure d’environ 33 % est observée entre 1989-1991 et 1997. Cette diminution serait liée à la baisse des concentrations de mercure chez les poissons vivant dans les réservoirs. Les espèces se nourrissant dans les milieux aquatiques, le pygargue à tête blanche et le balbuzard pêcheur, présentent des concentrations de mercure de 2 à 30 fois plus élevées que celles qui s’alimentent en milieux terrestres. Chez le pygargue à tête blanche, les concentrations apparaissent élevées et augmentent avec l’âge des oiseaux échantillonnés.

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 score0.166
Threshold uncertainty score0.334

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLe Naturaliste canadienSame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207