Toxicity of glyphosate and triclopyr using the frog embryo teratogenesis assay—<i>Xenopus</i>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The effects of glyphosate ([N-phosphonomethyl]glycine) and triclopyr ([[3,5,6-trichloro-2-pyridinyl]oxy]acetic acid) on the embryonic development of Xenopus laevis were evaluated using Frog Embryo Teratogenesis Assay—Xenopus (FETAX). Rodeo®, the isopropylamine (ipa) salt of glyphosate formulated without a surfactant was found to be the least toxic, with a LC5 and LC50 of 3,779 and 5,407 mg acid equivalent (AE)/L, respectively. The LC5 and LC50 of Roundup®, the ipa salt of glyphosate formulated with a surfactant, was 6.4 and 9.4 mg AE/L, respectively. The surfactant component of Roundup, polyoxyethyleneamine (POEA), had a LC5 and LC50 of 2.2 and 2.7 mg/L, respectively. Garlon® 3A, the triethylamine salt of triclopyr, had a LC5 and LC50 of 119 and 162.5 mg AE/L, respectively. The LC5 and LC50 of Garlon 4®, the butoxyethyl ester of triclopyr, was 6.7 and 9.3 mg AE/L, respectively. Considering a theoretical worst case scenario when the highest rates recommended for glyphosate (12 L of Roundup/ha) or triclopyr (8 L of Garlon/ha) are applied to water 15 cm in depth, the expected environmental concentrations calculated on the basis of AE would be 2.8 and 2.6 mg AE/L, respectively. The margins of safety (LC5/expected environmental concentrations) for frog embryos exposed to these concentrations would be approximately 2, 2, 47, and 1,312 for Roundup, Garlon 4, Garlon 3A, and Rodeo, respectively.
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) | 0.001 | 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".