Identification of the ecological requirements of important terrestrial ecotoxicological test species
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For about 20 years, standardized soil ecotoxicological tests have relied on the use of an artificial soil substrate (e.g., Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development; OECD). For both the extrapolation of data obtained in the laboratory to the field situation, as well as the biological assessment of contaminated sites, this approach alone is not sufficient anymore. For this reason a literature review has been performed to investigate the ecological requirements of important terrestrial ecotoxicological test species. The invertebrate species included were Eisenia fetida, E. andrei (earthworms), Enchytraeus albidus, E. crypticus (potworms), Folsomia candida (springtails), and Hypoaspis aculeifer (predatory mites). The ecological parameters included were pH, moisture content, temperature, soil (i.e., texture, water-holding capacity, organic matter content, etc.), and food. The results indicate that most of these species should be applicable to a wide range of natural soils, while for some "extreme" soils (e.g., very acid forest soils) alternative test species will be required. Thus, further research is required to identify such species as well as to fill the gaps of knowledge concerning the ecological requirements of the species investigated here. Key words: Collembola, Enchytraeidae, Gamasid mites, Lumbricidae, natural soils.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".