Effects of anionic polyacrylamide products on gill histopathology in juvenile rainbow trout (<i>Oncorhynchus mykiss</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anionic polyacrylamide (PAM) products are commonly used to remove suspended materials from turbid waters and to help mitigate soil erosion. In the present study, juvenile rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) were exposed to 3 mg/L to 300 mg/L of 10 commercially available PAM products (Clearflow Water Lynx Polymer Log and Clearflow Soil Lynx Granular Polymer; Clearflow Enviro Systems Group), and gill histological parameters were measured following either 7 d or 30 d of polymer exposure. A cationic polymer product (≤0.38 mg/L MagnaFloc 368; Ciba Specialty Chemical) was also tested for comparison. Mild gill lesions were observed in fish exposed to polymer products. Lamellar fusion, interlamellar hyperplasia, epithelial lifting, mucous cell metaplasia, and cell counts of epithelial swelling and necrosis/apoptosis were minimal in fish exposed to environmentally relevant concentrations of anionic polymer (≤30 mg/L). Gill morphology was largely unaffected by exposure to concentrations up to 300 mg/L of many PAM products. Several anionic polymer products noticeably affected gill tissue by increasing epithelial hypertrophy, interlamellar hyperplasia, mucous cell metaplasia, and the frequency of necrotic cells. The severity of the lesions lessened with time, suggesting that fish may have experienced a short-term irritant effect. Similar levels of gill pathology were frequently observed in fish exposed to cationic polymer MagnaFloc 368 despite the concentration being 1000-fold lower than that of the PAM products. These observations highlight the increased toxicity of cationic polymers to aquatic life compared with anionic PAMs.
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) | 0.001 | 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".