MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086416766 · doi:10.1080/714044796

Risk Posed by Pesticides to Aquatic Organisms in Rivers of Northern Inland New South Wales, Australia

2003· article· en· W2086416766 on OpenAlexaff
Monika Muschal, Michael St. J. Warne

Bibliographic record

VenueHuman and Ecological Risk Assessment An International Journal · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
Canadian institutionsDepartment of Environment and Conservation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndosulfanChlorpyrifosPesticideHazard quotientToxicologyAtrazineEnvironmental scienceRisk assessmentBiologyEnvironmental chemistryEcologyChemistryContamination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An ecological assessment was conducted to determine the risk posed by agricultural pesticides to inland rivers of north-west New South Wales (NSW), Australia. A preliminary screening of 30 pesticides provided a short-list of eight for further investigation (atrazine, chlorpyrifos, diuron, endosulfan, fluometuron, metolachlor, profenofos, prometryn). Selection was based on chemical characteristics, toxicity, detection frequencies and environmental concentrations. Hazard quotients were calculated for both spray and non-spray seasons. Where possible, hazard quotients were calculated for both acute and chronic exposures for crustaceans, insects, micro-organisms, molluscs, plants and vertebrates. Chlorpyrifos, endosulfan and profenofos posed a high hazard (HQ > 0.5). A probabilistic risk analysis indicated that chlorpyrifos, endosulfan and profenofos posed a risk from acute exposure during the spray season, while endosulfan also posed a risk from chronic exposure during the spray season. The risks posed by profenofos and chlorpyrifos were characterised by a low probability of detection, but these detections affected a high percentage of species. The risks posed by acute and chronic exposures of endosulfan were characterised by a high probability of detection, but only a limited number of these detections affected a high percentage of species. Risk during the non-spray season was not assessed, as the detection of pesticides was infrequent during this period. Keywords: ecological risk assessment cotton endosulfan chlorpyrifos profenofos

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

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)0.0090.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.279 · 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.

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

Citations32
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHuman and Ecological Risk Assessment An International JournalSame topicEnvironmental Toxicology and EcotoxicologyFrench-language works237,207