Toxicity of pesticides associated with potato production, including soil fumigants, to snapping turtle eggs (<i>C</i> <i>helydra Serpentina</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Turtles frequently oviposit in soils associated with agriculture and, thus, may be exposed to pesticides or fertilizers. The toxicity of a pesticide regime that is used for potato production in Ontario on the survivorship of snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) eggs was evaluated. The following treatments were applied to clean soil: 1) a mixture of the pesticides chlorothalonil, S-metolachlor, metribuzin, and chlorpyrifos, and 2) the soil fumigant metam sodium. Turtle eggs were incubated in soil in outdoor plots in which these mixtures were applied at typical and higher field application rates, where the eggs were subject to ambient temperature and weather conditions. The pesticide mixture consisting of chlorothalonil, S-metolachlor, metribuzin, and chlorpyrifos did not affect survivorship, deformities, or body size at applications up to 10 times the typical field application rates. Hatching success ranged between 87% and 100% for these treatments. Metam sodium was applied at 0.1¯ times, 0.3¯ times, 1 times, and 3 times field application rates. Eggs exposed to any application of metam sodium had 100% mortality. At typical field application rates, the chemical regime associated with potato production does not appear to have any detrimental impacts on turtle egg development, except for the use of the soil fumigant metam sodium, which is highly toxic to turtle eggs at the lowest recommended application rate.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".