Analysis of veterinary drug residues in fish and shrimp composites collected during the Canadian Total Diet Study, 1993–2004
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Thirty shrimp, marine fish, freshwater fish, and canned fish composite samples collected and prepared as part of the Canadian Total Diet Study were analysed for 39 different veterinary drug residues. The analyses were undertaken to obtain baseline data that could be used to estimate the dietary exposure of Canadians to these residues. The most frequently observed residue was AOZ (four out of 30 samples), the metabolite of furazolidone, at a range of 0.50 to 2.0 ng g(-1) wet weight. Other residues detected included enrofloxacin (three samples; 0.3-0.73 ng g(-1)), leucomalachite green (three samples; 0.73-1.2 ng g(-1)), oxolinic acid (two samples; 0.3-4.3 ng g(-1)), AMOZ (the metabolite of furaltadone; one sample; 0.40 ng g(-1)), chloramphenicol (one sample; 0.40 ng g(-1)), and SEM (the metabolite of nitrofurazone; one sample; 0.8 ng g(-1)). The results of this survey indicate that Canadians are exposed to low ng g-1 concentrations of some banned and unapproved veterinary drug residues via the consumption of certain fish and shrimp.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".