MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2108003082 · doi:10.1139/f05-063

Influence of acidic to basic water pH and natural organic matter on aluminum accumulation by gills of rainbow trout (<i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i>)

2005· article· en· W2108003082 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Anna R. Winter, J Nichols, Richard C. Playle

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGillRainbow troutSoft waterTroutChemistryDissolved organic carbonEnvironmental chemistryFisheryBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) (∼0.6 g) were exposed to 3 µmol Al·L–1in ion-poor water adjusted to pH 4–10 in the absence or presence of natural organic matter (NOM). Aluminum accumulation by trout gills was highest at pH 6–8, there was moderate Al accumulation by trout gills at pH 5 and 9, and trout at pH 4 and 10 did not accumulate any Al on their gills. NOM at 5 mg C·L–1eliminated Al accumulation by trout gills at all water pHs. These results are explained by NOM complexing Al and keeping Al in solution but off the gills, by H+competition with Al3+at low pH, by poor binding of the Al(OH)4–anion to negatively charged gills at high pH, and by polymerization and precipitation of Al onto the gills at intermediate water pH, especially if water pH in the gill micro environment is considered. Increased fish mortality at pH 10 in the presence of NOM is explained by the indirect effect of NOM tying up the limited amount of Ca in the ion-poor water.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations19
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology→French-language works237,207→