MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038696650 · doi:10.1080/10934520601011262

The capacity of the Gunderboom® in Mamaroneck Harbor on the reduction of<i>E. coli</i>and coliform bacteria from water and soft-shelled clams (<i>Mya arenaria</i>)

2006· article· en· W2038696650 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Anna K. Yeung-Cheung, Nadilynn J. Melendez

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part A · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFecal contamination and water quality
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Lethbridge
KeywordsColiform bacteriaBacteriaFecal coliformPublic parkIndicator bacteriaBiologyEnvironmental scienceEcologyVeterinary medicineWater qualityMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Harbor Island Park of Mamaroneck Harbor is one of the beaches that has been frequently closed to the public due to unsanitary swimming conditions. In 2002, a Gunderboom BPS (Beach Protection System) was reinstalled in Harbor Island Park to lower bacterial levels in swimming areas. The first Gunderboom had been destroyed by an oil spill several years before. The current Gunderboom is an 800 foot curtain made of a treated polypropylene/polyester fabric and the company claims a 99.1% coliform reduction with its use. In this study, water inside and outside the Gunderboom was tested weekly from June to August 2005, and bi-weekly from September to December 2005. Coliscan Membrane Filtration plates were used to recover the relative amounts of Escherichia coli and coliform bacteria from the water. Soft-shelled clams (Mya arenaria) living in both these areas were also tested for their E. coli and coliform bacteria level using 3M Petrifilm plates. Water was also tested from Hudson Park in New Rochelle, a frequently closed beach due to high levels of coliform bacteria, as well as from Read Sanctuary in Rye, a "pristine" beach. Our results showed the amount of E. coli and coliform bacteria recovered from the water inside the Gunderboom were significantly lower (P < 0.05) compared to outside the Gunderboom and Hudson Park. There was 81.9% reduction in E. coli and 51.6% reduction in coliform bacteria inside the Gunderboom as compared to the outside. In addition, significant differences (P < 0.05) were found with lower numbers of E. coli and coliform bacteria recovered from the clams inside the Gunderboom compared to outside the Gunderboom. In conclusion, the Gunderboom system installed in Mamaroneck Harbor resulted in a significant reduction of E. coli and coliform bacteria in the water and clam samples, thus proving its efficiency as a water filter.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score0.588

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.211 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part ASame topicFecal contamination and water qualityFrench-language works237,207