A microscale test to measure petroleum oil toxicity to mummichog embryos
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A test was developed to compare the toxicity of different petroleum oils to mummichog (Fundulus heteroclitus) embryos. Fertilized eggs were incubated for 11 days at 22.5 degrees C directly on the surface of oil-contaminated sand without a superficial water layer. The mortality rates, the stage of development, and the prevalence of malformations were determined. No effect was found in controls incubated on sand with water and mineral oil as compared with controls on sand with water alone. Two weathered oils, an Alaska North Slope crude oil (ANCO) and a Mesa light crude oil (MLCO), produced similar symptoms of toxicity: retarded growth and development, pericardial edema, hemostasis, hemorrhages, and spinal deformities. These symptoms are consistent with those observed in other fish species exposed to petroleum oils, suggesting that the results of the bioassay would be applicable to other species. MLCO was more embryotoxic than ANCO. The minimal oil concentrations causing a significant reduction in body length were 4.5 microg oil/g sand for MLCO and 12.7 microg oil/g for ANCO, indicating the assay is sensitive. The slopes and the intercepts of the relationships between concentration and growth did not differ in three dose-response experiments conducted with each oil, indicating that the assay is reliable. Finally, the bioassay is less costly than other available options to assess the toxicity of petroleum oils to marine fish embryos. Further work to improve the standardization of the assay will involve comparison of the toxicity of petroleum oils with reference toxicants and selection of a standard substrate.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".