Aerobic Biofilms Grown from Athabasca Watershed Sediments Are Inhibited by Increasing Concentrations of Bituminous Compounds
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sediments from the Athabasca River and its tributaries naturally contain bitumen at various concentrations, but the impacts of this variation on the ecology of the river are unknown. Here, we used controlled rotating biofilm reactors in which we recirculated diluted sediments containing various concentrations of bituminous compounds taken from the Athabasca River and three tributaries. Biofilms exposed to sediments having low and high concentrations of bituminous compounds were compared. The latter were 29% thinner, had a different extracellular polysaccharide composition, 67% less bacterial biomass per μm2, 68% less cyanobacterial biomass per μm2, 64% less algal biomass per μm2, 13% fewer protozoa per cm2, were 21% less productive, and had a 33% reduced content in chlorophyll a per mm2 and a 20% reduction in the expression of photosynthetic genes, but they had a 23% increase in the expression of aromatic hydrocarbon degradation genes. Within the Bacteria, differences in community composition were also observed, with relatively more Alphaproteobacteria and Betaproteobacteria and less Cyanobacteria, Bacteroidetes, and Firmicutes in biofilms exposed to high concentrations of bituminous compounds. Altogether, our results suggest that biofilms that develop in the presence of higher concentrations of bituminous compounds are less productive and have lower biomass, linked to a decrease in the activities and abundance of photosynthetic organisms likely due to inhibitory effects. However, within this general inhibition, some specific microbial taxa and functional genes are stimulated because they are less sensitive to the inhibitory effects of bituminous compounds or can degrade and utilize some bitumen-associated compounds.
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".