MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Comparison of Acute Toxicity of Biodiesel, Biodiesel Blends, and Diesel on Aquatic Organisms

2007· article· en· W2037424556 on OpenAlexaff
Nalissa Khan, Mostafa Warith, Grace K. Luk

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Air & Waste Management Association · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiodiesel Production and Applications
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiodieselDiesel fuelEnvironmental scienceWaste managementAcute toxicityToxicityPulp and paper industryChemistryEngineeringOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The increased demand of alternative energy sources has created interest in biodiesel and biodiesel blends; biodiesel is promoted as a diesel substitute that is safer, produces less harmful combustion emissions, and biodegrades more easily. Like diesel spills, biodiesel can have deleterious effects on the aquatic environments. The effect of neat biodiesel, biodiesel blends, and diesel on Oncorhynchus mykiss and Daphnia magna was evaluated using acute toxicity testing. Static nonrenewal bioassays of freshwater organisms containing B100, B50, B20, B5, and conventional diesel fuel were used to compare the acute effects of biodiesel to diesel. Mortality was the significant end point measured in this study; percent mortality and lethal concentration (LC50) at different exposure times were determined from the acute toxicity tests performed. Trials were considered valid if the controls exhibited > 90% survival. Based on percentage of mortality and LC50 values, a toxicity ranking of fuels was developed.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations69
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Air & Waste Management AssociationSame topicBiodiesel Production and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207