Probabilistic risk assessment of cotton pyrethroids: II. Aquatic mesocosm and field studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Results of mesocosm and field studies with cypermethrin and esfenvalerate were analyzed and interpreted to support an ecological risk assessment of cotton pyrethroids in aquatic ecosystems. A core group of seven mesocosm studies conducted on two continents over the course of a decade were examined, and additional observations from mesocosm and field studies with these and other cotton pyrethroids were also brought to bear. The results for cypermethrin and esfenvalerate were remarkably consistent. They revealed a trend in sensitivity from amphipods, isopods, midges, mayflies, copepods, and cladocerans (most sensitive) to fish, snails, oligochaetes, and rotifers (least sensitive). With few exceptions, populations affected by pyrethroids in the mesocosms recovered to normal levels before the end of the year of exposure; most populations recovered within weeks. Factors presumed responsible for population recovery included internal refuges (areas of low exposure), resistant life stages, rapid generation times, and egg deposition by adults from outside the treated systems. Indirect effects on fish (which have been hypothesized to occur when invertebrate food sources are reduced) were not observed. The lowest-observed-adverse-effect concentrations for the overall ecosystems for cypermethrin and esfenvalerate corresponded to the 54th and 41st centiles of acute toxicity endpoints (LC50s) for arthropods measured in laboratory studies with these compounds, implying that a risk characterization based on 10th centiles would be highly conservative.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".