MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070569657 · doi:10.1080/10934520902928404

Escape and survival of<i>Corophium volutator</i>and<i>Ilyanassa obsoleta</i>exposed to freshwater and chlorothalonil

2009· article· en· W2070569657 on OpenAlexafffund
Jocelyne Hellou, Art Cook, Benoit A. Lalonde, Peter Walker, K. Dunphy, Sarah L. MacLeod

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part A · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
Canadian institutionsBedford Institute of OceanographyEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaFisheries and Oceans CanadaDalhousie University
FundersHealth CanadaDalhousie UniversityFonds National de la Recherche Luxembourg
KeywordsChlorothalonilBiologySeawaterPesticideSalinityInvertebrateEcologyAnimal scienceZoology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The behavioural response and survival of marine mud snails and mud shrimp exposed to freshwater and the fungicide chlorothalonil (tetrachloroisophthalonitrile) was investigated. Amphipods were less tolerant of lower salinity than snails, with 50 and 76% survival associated with 5 and 0% seawater in freshwater, respectively. However, 50% of snails displayed a defence mechanism by retracting within their shell when exposed to 70% freshwater. Both species displayed an avoidance to chlorothalonil spiked at >100 ng/g and/or >100 ng/mL in sediments and seawater, respectively. The avoidance response of amphipods was observed along with a reduced swimming ability and increased lipid content. Snails displayed a higher susceptibility to physical stress, with an increased number unable to twist from being on their shell to their foot, and with longer righting time. Behaviour was affected at chlorothalonil concentrations of 0.001-0.01 ng/g and/or ng/mL, with a variability that could be due to degradation by the microbial community. Ascertaining the latter observations requires state-of-the-art chemical analyses.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.667

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations17
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Science and Health Part ASame topicEnvironmental Toxicology and EcotoxicologyFrench-language works237,207