Multivariate analysis of toxicological and environmental properties of soil nematicides
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In intensive agriculture, the use of pesticides and soil fumigants is necessary to produce economically viable crops worldwide. However, this practice may involve undesirable effects on human health and the environment. In 1995, methyl bromide was restricted by the Montreal Protocol because of possible ozone depletion. The objective of this study was to compare intrinsic environmental and toxicological properties of 11 active substances with nematicidal properties, some of them recognized as methyl bromide alternatives. RESULTS: Four groups of active substances were discriminated by a series of principal component analyses (PCAs): (a) high toxicity to non-target fauna, humans and animals and medium persistence in the environment (cadusafos, ethoprophos and fenamiphos); (b) high toxicity to humans, animals and non-target fauna and high persistence (carbofuran and fosthiazate); (c) low toxicity to non-target fauna, humans and animals and low persistence (carbosulfan, benfuracarb and oxamyl); (d) low toxicity to humans, animals and non-target fauna and medium persistence in the environment (1,3-dichloropropene, chloropicrin and methyl bromide). CONCLUSION: Evaluating the multiple aspects of toxicological and environmental properties of active substances through PCA is proposed as a helpful tool for initially comparing the complex toxicological behaviour of active substances as plant protection products.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".