MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150721644 · doi:10.4081/xeno.2012.e10

Congener specific distribution and health risk assessment of polychlorinated biphenyls in urban soils

2012· article· en· W2150721644 on OpenAlex
Bhupander Kumar, Sanjay Kumar, Chandra Shekhar Sharma

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Xenobiotics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoil waterEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryPollutantCongenerHealth riskEnvironmental engineeringChemistryEnvironmental healthSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were primarily used in transformers and capacitors, lubricants, flame retardants, plasticizers, paint, carbonless papers, etc. These are capable of long-range atmospheric transport and have been designated as persistent organic pollutants by the Stockholm Convention. Due to their characteristic properties, PCBs are found worldwide in all environmental matrices (including human) and biota. Soils are usually considered to be the source as well as sink for environmental pollutants, with cumulative effects of long-range atmospheric transport and local sources. Around the world, comparatively higher concentrations of PCBs have been reported in urban soils than suburban or rural soils. Higher amount of PCBs in urban soils may cause toxicological health risks to urban residents through ingestion, inhalation and skin contact. This paper presents the PCB distribution in soils from Delhi, India, and exposure risk estimates for human health through soil ingestion. The concentration of ΣPCBs ranged between 1.08-100.67 ng g<sup>–1</sup> (mean 21.16 ng g<sup>–1</sup>±5.24 ng g<sup>–1</sup>), which was much lower than the Canadian soil quality guideline value of 1.3 mg/kg or 1300 ng g<sup>–1</sup>. Human health risk estimates through the soil ingestion pathway were made in terms of lifetime average daily dose (LADD), incremental lifetime cancer risks and non-carcinogenic hazard quotient (HQ). The LADD for Delhi adults and children was 3.02x10<sup>–8</sup> mg kg<sup>–1</sup> d<sup>–1</sup> and 1.57x10<sup>–7</sup> mg kg<sup>–1</sup> d<sup>–1</sup>, respectively, which corresponds to toxic equivalent quotients (TEQ) intake of 0.105 pg TEQ kg<sup>–1</sup> d<sup>–1</sup> (0.735 pg TEQ kg<sup>–1</sup> week<sup>–1</sup>) and 0.543 pg TEQ kg<sup>–1</sup> d<sup>–1</sup> (3.801 pg TEQ kg<sup>–1</sup> week<sup>–1</sup>), respectively. The estimated LADD for Delhi residents was lower than the acceptable intake values recommended by the World Health Organization (1 pg TEQ kg<sup>–1</sup> d<sup>–1</sup>), the European Commission (14 pg TEQ kg<sup>–1</sup>;1 week<sup>–1</sup>) and by the Japanese government (4 pg TEQ kg<sup>–1</sup> d<sup>–1</sup>). The probability of cancer risk ranges from 6.04x10<sup>–8</sup> (ΣPCBs) to 1.57x10<sup>–5</sup> (ΣTEQ) and 3.13x10–7 (ΣPCBs) to 8.15x10–5 (ΣTEQ) for adults and children, respectively, and was within acceptable ranges of 10<sup>–6</sup> to 10<sup>–4</sup>. The non-carcinogenic risk in terms of health HQ was 0.105 and 0.330 for adults and children, respectively, which was lower than the acceptable limit of 1. The study found lower concentrations of PCBs than guideline values and low health risk estimates through the soil ingestion pathway within acceptable levels, indicating a minimum risk for Delhi residents.

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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.345

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.266 · 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