Fugacity and activity analysis of the bioaccumulation and environmental risks of decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As part of an initiative to evaluate commercial chemicals for their effects on human and environmental health, Canada recently evaluated decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5; CAS no. 541-02-06), a high-volume production chemical used in many personal care products. The evaluation illustrated the challenges encountered in environmental risk assessments and the need for the development of better tools to increase the weight of evidence in environmental risk assessments. The present study presents a new risk analysis method that applies thermodynamic principles of fugacity and activity to express the results of field monitoring and laboratory bioaccumulation and toxicity studies in a comprehensive risk analysis that can support risk assessments. Fugacity and activity ratios of D5 derived from bioaccumulation measures indicate that D5 does not biomagnify in food webs, likely because of biotransformation. The fugacity and activity analysis further demonstrates that reported no-observed-effect concentrations of D5 normally cannot occur in the environment. Observed fugacities and activities in the environment are, without exception, far below those corresponding with no observed effects, in many cases by several orders of magnitude. This analysis supports the conclusion of the Canadian Board of Review and the Minister of the Environment that D5 does not pose a danger to the environment. The present study further illustrates some of the limitations of a persistence-bioaccumulation-toxicity-type criteria-based risk assessment approach and discusses the merits of the fugacity and activity approach to increase the weight of evidence and consistency in environmental risk assessments of commercial chemicals.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".