MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2021647699 · doi:10.1080/10807039.2012.723180

Estimating the Toxicity of Pesticide Mixtures to Aquatic Organisms: A Review

2013· review· en· W2021647699 on OpenAlexaff
Sara I Rodney, R. Scott Teed, Dwayne R. J. Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman and Ecological Risk Assessment An International Journal · 2013
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
Canadian institutionsIntrinsik (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPesticideEnvironmental scienceAquatic toxicologyAquatic ecosystemAquatic environmentEnvironmental chemistryBiochemical engineeringBiotaEnvironmental protectionToxicologyEcologyToxicityBiologyChemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT A major difficulty in addressing chemical mixtures through legislation or regulations revolves around our limited understanding of their potential impacts. This review provides an overview of recent research on pesticide mixture toxicity to aquatic biota and the methods employed to predict toxic effects. The most common approaches are to assume concentration-addition or independent action of chemicals in a mixture. There are a number of cases in the literature of interactions between pesticides. However, models accounting for possible interactions between mixture components are used infrequently. Although results are limited, studies investigating the effects of pesticide mixtures have not demonstrated significant synergism at environmentally relevant concentrations. Based on the results of our review, we conclude that the concentration-addition model is a generally conservative and practical first-tier model for the ecological assessment of pesticide mixtures in aquatic systems. Key Words: pesticidesmixture toxicityconcentration-addition. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This research was funded by Crop Life America.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.965
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations84
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman and Ecological Risk Assessment An International JournalSame topicEnvironmental Toxicology and EcotoxicologyFrench-language works237,207