Documentation of the endotoxins present in the ambient air of cotton fiber textile mills in Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cotton workers are recognized as being at risk of developing occupational lung diseases. Some researchers have identified endotoxins as being a potential etiologic agent for some of the respiratory problems. This study wants to document the concentration of endotoxins found in the ambient air of textile mills where cotton fibers are handled and to identify the processing steps where the highest endotoxins concentrations in the air were found and the one where the relative limit values (RLVs) are exceeded. The 4 mills studied process cotton fibers. All the air samples were analyzed using the chromogenic Limulus Amoebocytes lysate LAL method using a kinetic detection principle based on the IRSST's standard method. In this study, a large variability in the concentrations of endotoxins in the air was observed, depending on the mill, the processing step, and the time. Despite these variations, some processes can be identified as being major generators of endotoxins in the ambient air of the mills. The highest concentrations were measured in the weaving and drawing processes and reached 10,000 EU m(-3) of air. The opening, cleaning, carding, spinning and drawing processes are the other major endotoxins generating processes with concentrations from 24 to 8,700 EU m(-3) of air. The endotoxins concentrations exceeded the RLVs for 55% of the workstations in this project. This study demonstrated that endotoxins levels in the cotton industry are high and appropriate control measures are needed.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".