MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Study of heavy metal concentration and partitioning in the Estrela River: implications for the pollution in Guanabara Bay - SE Brazil

2011· article· en· W2072282846 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Carlos Marclei Arruda Rangel, José Antônio Baptista Neto, Estefan Monteiro da Fonseca, J.J. McAlister, Bernard Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueAnais da Academia Brasileira de Ciências · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy metals in environment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoQueen's University
KeywordsBayOrganic matterEnvironmental chemistrySedimentPollutionEnvironmental sciencePollutantDissolutionContaminationHeavy metalsFractionationFluvialGeologyChemistryEcologyOceanographyGeomorphology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, the geochemical analysis of ten sediment samples collected along the fluvial system of the Estrela River, which flows into the northern portion of Guanabara Bay, shows the presence of anthropogenic impacts in this area. Concentrations of Fe, Mn, Zn, Cu, Pb, Cr and Ni obtained were slightly higher, when compared with values found in natural environments. The particle size and organic matter content in most of the analyzed stations showed features not conducive to the accumulation of pollutants due to the low organic matter content and the strong presence of sand fraction. There was also the fractionation of heavy metals in sediments and it was found the prominence of residual and reducible phase, besides the significant occurrence of organic fractions in some analyzed stations. These factors, thus, highlight the potential risks of contamination, where the metals associated with the organic phase can become bioavailable in processes of dissolution, provided by physico-chemical changes that can occur in this aquatic environment.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.419

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.251 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnais da Academia Brasileira de CiênciasSame topicHeavy metals in environmentFrench-language works237,207