Evaluation of biologically mediated changes in oil sands naphthenic acid composition by <i><scp>C</scp>hlamydomonas reinhardtii</i> using negative‐ion electrospray orbitrap mass spectrometry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Industrial activity associated with oil-sands extraction in Canada's Athabasca region produces a variety of contaminants of concern, including naphthenic acid fraction components (NAFCs). NAFCs are a complex mixture of organic compounds that are poorly understood both in terms of their chemical composition and effects on the environment. NAFC toxicity in the unicellular green algae Chlamydomonas reinhardtii P.A.Dangeard was correlated with the presence of the algal cell wall. It was suggested that the toxicity of NAFCs in C. reinhardtii was due to surfactant effects. Surfactant-cell wall interactions are specific and governed by the compound class and structure, and by the nature of the biological material. Here, we investigate the effects of wildtype (WT) C. reinhardtii and two cell-wall mutants on specific classes of NAFCs when growing cultures were treated with a 100 mg · L(-1) solution of NAFCs. Changes in the NAFC composition in the media were examined using high resolution mass spectrometry over a period of 4 d. Algal mediated changes in the NAFCs were limited to specific classes of NAFCs. In particular, the removal of large, classical naphthenic acids, with a double bond equivalent of 8, was observed in WT C. reinhardtii cultures. The observed algal mediated changes in NAFC composition would have been masked by low resolution mass spectrometry and highlight the importance of this tool in examining bioremediation of complex mixtures of NAFCs.
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) | 0.000 | 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".