Organophosphate Levels in Apple Composites and Individual Apples from a Treated Canadian Orchard
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Azinphos-methyl, phosalone, and phosmet were applied individually to separate rows of trees within a commercial apple orchard in Quebec, Canada, during the 2003 agricultural season. Apples were collected for residue analysis immediately prior to the harvesting of the remaining apples for market distribution and were prepared for analysis as both individual apples and as composites of eight individuals. Analysis of the three applied compounds, as well as five organophosphate insecticides that were not applied, was performed using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. Azinphos-methyl, phosalone, and phosmet, which were applied, were detected in all samples analyzed at concentrations ranging from 0.004 ng/g to 2260 ng/g. Methidathion was not observed in any sample. Chlorpyrifos, diazinon, dimethoate, and malathion concentrations ranged from below method detection limits to 0.71 ng/g, and the detection frequency for these compounds ranged from 20% to 100%. Residues measured in this study were all below the Canadian maximum residue limit for apples. Variability factors ranged from 2 to 19 for all compounds observed in this study. Composite samples may not accurately reflect the extremes of exposure from consumption of single servings of apples.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".