Brominated and chlorinated flame retardants in Lake Ontario, Canada, lake trout (<i>Salvelinus namaycush</i>) between 1979 and 2004 and possible influences of food-web changes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Concentrations of non-polybrominated diphenyl ether (PBDE) brominated (hexabromocyclododecane [HBCD], 1,2-bis[2,4,6-tribromophenoxy]ethane [BTBPE], and pentabromoethylbenzene [PEB]) and chlorinated (Dechlorane Plus [DP] as well as short- and medium-chain chlorinated paraffins [SCCP and MCCP, respectively]) flame retardants were evaluated in archived Lake Ontario, Canada, lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) samples collected between 1979 and 2004. Polybrominated diphenyl ethers also were analyzed to provide a point of reference for comparison to previous studies. Concentrations of the dominant PBDE congeners (BDEs 28, 47, 99, 100, 153, and 154) increased significantly from 1979 until the mid-1990s, then either leveled off or decreased significantly between 1998 and 2004, a result that corresponds to those of previous studies. In contrast, BDE 209 increased approximately fourfold between 1998 and 2004. The temporal trends of the non-PBDE flame retardants varied, with sum (sigma) HBCD and DP showing significant overall decreases; BTBPE, sigmaSCCP, and sigmaMCCP showing parabolic trends; and PEB showing no overall change during the study period. Because many of the non-PBDE chemicals may be used as replacements for penta- and octa-BDE mixtures, these results will provide a baseline to evaluate future usage patterns. Possible changes in food-web structure, evaluated through stable nitrogen isotopes (delta15N), may be influencing our interpretations of contaminant trends in lake trout and are hypothesized to be partially responsible for the observed decrease in concentrations of BDEs 28, 47, 99, 100, 153, and 154 between 1998 and 2004. Retrospective analyses evaluating temporal trends in stable isotope values at the base of the food web, however, are recommended to test this hypothesis further.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".