MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2140488269 · doi:10.1139/f10-070

Selenium incorporation in fish otoliths: effects of selenium and mercury from the water

2010· article· en· W2140488269 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aude Lochet, Karin E. Limburg, Lars G. Rudstam, Mario Montesdeoca

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Materials ResearchNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Science Foundation
KeywordsOtolithSeleniumMercury (programming language)Environmental chemistryMERCUREFish <Actinopterygii>MicrochemistryChemistryTrace elementFisheryBiologyChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To study fish migration using otolith microchemistry, it is important to understand the relationship between elements in the otoliths and in the surrounding water, including potential interactions with other elements. Selenium (Se) is a trace element with strong affinity for mercury (Hg). To test if Se is a reliable tracer for fish migration, the effects of dissolved Se and Hg concentrations on Se incorporation in fish otoliths were investigated experimentally. Brown bullheads ( Ameiurus nebulosus ) were reared in waters spiked with various concentrations of inorganic Se and Hg. Otolith Se:Ca increased nonlinearly with dissolved Se concentrations as there was no significant difference between fish reared in low and medium [Se] waters (Se:Ca for low [Se] waters, 7.64 × 10−6; medium, 6.59 × 10−6; high, 1.24 × 10−5). Our study also provided the first evidence of a negative effect of Hg on Se incorporation into otoliths (p = 0.01), a phenomenon most evident in high [Se] waters. Because of the influence of Hg, caution should be taken when inferring fish migration based on Se.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences→Same topicMercury impact and mitigation studies→French-language works237,207→