TRANSFORMATION OF 2,4,6-TRINITROTOLUENE IN SOIL IN THE PRESENCE OF THE EARTHWORM EISENIA ANDREI
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability of the earthworm Eisenia andrei to metabolize 2,4,6-trinitrotoluene (TNT) was studied in experiments with TNT-spiked soils, dermal contact tests, and with an in vitro assay. Lethality of TNT in a forest sandy soil was first determined (14-d LC50 5 143 mg/kg). Then TNT at lethal and sublethal concentrations was applied to the same soil and was monitored along with its metabolites in extracts of soil and earthworm tissue for up to 14 d postapplication. High performance liquid chromatography– ultra violet analyses indicated that TNT was transformed in the presence of E. andrei by a reductive pathway to 2-amino-4,6- dinitrotoluene (2-ADNT), 4-amino-2,6-dinitrotoluene (4-ADNT), 2,4-diamino-6-nitrotoluene (2,4-DANT), and traces of 2,6-diamino- 4-nitrotoluene (2,6-DANT) in earthworm tissues. This transformation could be explained by either a metabolic mechanism within the earthworm or by the enhancement of an earthworm-associated microbial activity or both. The TNT concentrations decreased from the spiked soils. However, the monoamino-dinitrotoluene (2-ADNT and 4-ADNT) concentrations increased with exposure duration and were dependent on the initial TNT soil concentrations. This was also observed to a lesser extent in the TNTspiked soils with no earthworms present. The biotransformation of TNT into 2-ADNT, 4-ADNT, and 2,4-DANT and the presence of these metabolites in E. andrei after dermal contact on TNT-spiked filter paper showed that dermal uptake can be a significant exposure route for TNT. In vitro experiments showed that earthworm homogenate could metabolize TNT and form 2-ADNT and 4-ADNT at room temperature and at 378C. This effect was inhibited by heat inactivation prior to incubation or by incubation at 48C, suggesting that the biotransformation of TNT in the presence of E. andrei may be enzymatic in nature.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".