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 OpenAlexaboutno aff
Bhupander Kumar, Sanjay Kumar, Chandra Shekhar Sharma

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–1 (mean 21.16 ng g–1±5.24 ng g–1), which was much lower than the Canadian soil quality guideline value of 1.3 mg/kg or 1300 ng g–1. 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 3.02x10–8 mg kg–1 d–1 and 1.57x10–7 mg kg–1 d–1, respectively, which corresponds to toxic equivalent quotients (TEQ) intake of 0.105 pg TEQ kg–1 d–1 (0.735 pg TEQ kg–1 week–1) and 0.543 pg TEQ kg–1 d–1 (3.801 pg TEQ kg–1 week–1), respectively. The estimated LADD for Delhi residents was lower than the acceptable intake values recommended by the World Health Organization (1 pg TEQ kg–1 d–1), the European Commission (14 pg TEQ kg–1;1 week–1) and by the Japanese government (4 pg TEQ kg–1 d–1). The probability of cancer risk ranges from 6.04x10–8 (ΣPCBs) to 1.57x10–5 (ΣTEQ) and 3.13x10–7 (ΣPCBs) to 8.15x10–5 (ΣTEQ) for adults and children, respectively, and was within acceptable ranges of 10–6 to 10–4. 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.

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)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
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

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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of XenobioticsSame topicToxic Organic Pollutants ImpactFrench-language works237,207