Influence of sediment biofilm on the behaviour of aluminum and its bioavailability to the snail <i>Lymnaea stagnalis</i> in neutral freshwater
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An important influence on the behaviour, bioavailability, and toxicity of Al in neutral freshwater is its ability to form complexes with organic material such as humic acids and extracellular polymeric substances (EPS). This paper examines the influence of EPS, secreted by a natural bacterial biofilm associated with a pebble substrate ("sediment biofilm") and by the snail Lymnaea stagnalis, on the behaviour of Al in the water column and its bioavailability to the snail. Both sediment biofilm and snails were a significant source of aqueous EPS. Added Al stimulated the production of EPS by the snail but not by bacterial biofilm. Repeated elevation of the concentration of Al in the water by 500 µg Al·L1 but not 100 µg Al·L1 over 10 days resulted in a progressive rise of Al in the water column in the absence but not in the presence of sediment biofilm. Up to 150 µg Al·cm2 was associated with the sediment biofilm, and we suggest that sediment is a significant "sink" for aqueous Al. EPS avidly binds colloidal Al, and we propose that the sediment biofilm is an important influence on the behaviour and bioavailability of Al in running waters when amounts of humic substances are low.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".