MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054333703 · doi:10.1080/15321810701603799

Rapid Detection of Selected Steroid Hormones from Sewage Effluents using an ELISA in the Kuils River Water Catchment Area, South Africa

2007· article· en· W2054333703 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nelius Swart, Edmund John Pool

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Immunoassay and Immunochemistry · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEffluentSewageEnvironmental scienceEstroneSewage treatmentHormoneEnvironmental chemistryBiologyChemistryEnvironmental engineeringEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Steroid hormones are naturally synthesized by both humans and animals and are released into the environment. Significant levels of steroid hormones have been detected in sewage effluent around the world. The potential problem is that these hormones may interfere with the normal function of the endocrine systems, thus affecting reproduction and development in wildlife. Due to the major shortage of water in Western Cape, South Africa there is a great need to recycle water by either direct or indirect methods. The treated sewage effluent-natural surface water mixture found in the Kuils and Eerste Rivers is used directly for irrigation of agricultural areas. Sewage effluents were collected from four sites (Jonkershoek, Belville, Zandvliet, and Macassar) and subjected to C(18) solid phase extraction. Commercially available rapid ELISA kits were validated for the quantification of estrogens in these sewage effluent samples. Analysis of estrone, estradiol, and estriol levels showed a significant difference between the control site (Jonkershoek) and sewage effluent from the three sewage treatment works. Steroid hormone concentrations detected in these sewage effluents were similar to reports from Britain, Italy, Germany, Canada, and Netherlands.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.470
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 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

Citations47
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Immunoassay and ImmunochemistrySame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207