MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2029376938 · doi:10.1139/f04-143

Coupling of methyl and total mercury in a minerotrophic peat bog in southeastern Sweden

2004· article· en· W2029376938 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Olof Regnell, Tommy Hammar

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNaturvårdsverket
KeywordsPeatBogMercury (programming language)Environmental chemistryChemistryMethylmercuryParticulatesHydrology (agriculture)EcologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During most of an annual cycle, we studied the temporal variation of total mercury (HgT) and methyl mercury (MeHg) in unfiltered and filtered (0.45 µ) peat water from a minerotrophic peat bog in southeastern Sweden. MeHg in bulk water ([MeHgT]) and total Hg in filtered water in discharge water from the peat bog ([HgD]) were an order of magnitude higher than in upland runoff water entering the peat bog. At the discharge end, peat-water [HgD] and [MeHgD] ranged from 8 to 54 pmol·L–1 and from 1 to 32 pmol·L–1, respectively. Whereas the variation of [MeHgT] was explained by changes in [MeHgD], the variation of inorganic HgT [IHgT] = [HgT] – [MeHgT] was explained by changes in particle-bound IHg [IHgP] = [IHgT] – [IHgD]. Filterable organic matter and sulfide in the water both correlated poorly with [HgD]. Neither did the amount of HgT in precipitation and upland runoff water correlate well with the estimated discharge of HgD from the peat bog. However, there was a strong correlation between [HgD] and [MeHgT] in the peat water (r = 0.96). Furthermore, a significant fraction of HgD was MeHg (mean 28%; range 8–60%). These results suggest that methylation increased the mobility of Hg.

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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations13
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMercury impact and mitigation studies→French-language works237,207→