Determination of polychlorinated biphenyl and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon elimination rates in adult green and leopard frogs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the present study was to quantify elimination kinetics of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) in adult green frogs (Rana clamitans) and leopard frogs (Rana pipiens). Three experiments were conducted: PCB elimination rate constants were determined for both frog species, and PAH elimination rate constants were determined for leopard frogs only. In green frogs, significant PCB elimination rate constants ranged from 0.013 to 0.04 d(-1) (time for frogs to achieve 90% steady state with water [t90] = 57.8-178.2 d). In leopard frogs, significant PCB elimination rate constants ranged from 0.004 to 0.047 d(-1) (t90 = 48.8-657.9 d). Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon elimination in leopard frogs was faster than PCB elimination in either frog species: Significant PAH rate constants ranged from 0.069 to 0.188 d(-1) (t90 = 12.2-33.5 d). In both species, and for both PCBs and PAHs, a significant inverse relationship was found between the chemical elimination rate constant and Kow. These results show that adult anurans have relatively low elimination rates of PCBs but exhibit a small capacity for metabolic biotransformation of PAHs that is comparable to that of invertebrates but lower than that of fish. These findings suggest that adult amphibians have the potential to be used as biomonitors for persistent organic chemicals.
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".