MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134487445 · doi:10.1002/etc.5620220509

Inverse relationship between bioconcentration factor and exposure concentration for metals: Implications for hazard assessment of metals in the aquatic environment

2003· article· en· W2134487445 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Toxicology and Chemistry · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
Canadian institutionsNatural Resources Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioconcentrationBioaccumulationBiomagnificationEnvironmental chemistryChemistryContext (archaeology)Biology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The bioconcentration factor (BCF) and bioaccumulation factor (BAF) are used as the criteria for bioaccumulation in the context of identifying and classifying substances that are hazardous to the aquatic environment. The BCF/BAF criteria, while developed as surrogates for chronic toxicity and/or biomagnification of anthropogenic organic substances, are applied to all substances including metals. This work examines the theoretical and experimental basis for the use of BCF/BAF in the hazard assessment of Zn, Cd, Cu, Pb, Ni, and Ag. As well, BCF/BAFs for Hg (methyl and inorganic forms) and hexachlorobenzene (HCB) were evaluated. The BCF/BAF data for Zn, Cd, Cu, Pb, Ni, and Ag were characterized by extreme variability in mean BCF/BAF values and a clear inverse relationship between BCF/BAF and aqueous exposure. The high variability persisted when even when data were limited to an exposure range where chronic toxicity would be expected. Mean BCF/BAF values for Hg were also variable, but the inverse relationship was equivocal, in contrast with HCB, which conformed to the BCF model. This study illustrates that the BCF/BAF criteria, as currently applied, are inappropriate for the hazard identification and classification of metals. Furthermore, using BCF and BAF data leads to conclusions that are inconsistent with the toxicological data, as values are highest (indicating hazard) at low exposure concentrations and are lowest (indicating no hazard) at high exposure concentrations, where impacts are likely. Bioconcentration and bioaccumulation factors do not distinguish between essential mineral nutrient, normal background metal bioaccumulation, the adaptive capabilities of animals to vary uptake and elimination within the spectrum of exposure regimes, nor the specific ability to sequester, detoxify, and store internalized metal from metal uptake that results in adverse effect. An alternative to BCF, the accumulation factor (ACF), for metals was assessed and, while providing an improvement, it did not provide a complete solution. A bioaccumulation criterion for the hazard identification of metals is required, and work directed at linking chronic toxicity and bioaccumulation may provide some solutions.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.158
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it