Sex ratios in the arctic—do man‐made chemicals matter?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objective was to analyze the variation of secondary sex ratios across the Arctic and to estimate the time trend. The rationale for this was claims in news media that, in the Arctic, sex ratios have become reduced due to exposure to anthropogenic contaminants in the environment. METHODS: Data was collected from 27 circumpolar jurisdictions from public websites of the eight Arctic countries. Sex ratios at birth were calculated for each jurisdiction and each available year. Linear regression models of the sex ratios across time were fit within each jurisdiction to estimate the change in sex ratio over time. RESULTS: All male:female sex ratios were close to 1.05 with time trends close to 0. In a Bayesian hierarchical model overall sex ratio was estimated at 1.054 (95% confidence interval 1.048, 1.058). The estimate for the 10-year slope across all jurisdictions was 0.0010 (95% confidence interval -0.0021, 0.0046). Separate analyses of indigenous populations in Alaska and Greenland gave similar results and similar sex ratios were found among Greenland Inuit in 1900 and today. CONCLUSIONS: The absence of deviation of the secondary sex ratio in any of the Arctic jurisdictions indicates that the contaminants that are present are not disrupting endocrine systems to the extent that sex ratios are being affected.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".