MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151280893 · doi:10.1897/ieam_2008-058.1

A long-term, multitrophic level study to assess pulp and paper mill effluent effects on aquatic communities in four us receiving waters: Lessons learned

2008· article· en· W2151280893 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy Hall, Robert P. Fisher, John H. Rodgers, G. Wayne Minshall, Wayne G. Landis, Tibor Kovács, Barry Firth, Monique G. Dubé, Camille Flinders, Thomas L. Deardorff, Dennis L. Borton

Bibliographic record

VenueIntegrated Environmental Assessment and Management · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFish Ecology and Management Studies
Canadian institutionsCRB Innovations (Canada)University of SaskatchewanFPInnovations
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEffluentMinnowEnvironmental sciencePaper millWater qualityBioassayPopulationPeriphytonEcologyEnvironmental engineeringBiologyFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>Biomass (ecology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lessons learned from the development, implementation, and initial 8 y of study findings from a long-term study to assess the effects of pulp and paper mill effluents on receiving waters are summarized as a conclusion to a series of articles (this issue) on study findings. The study, based on industry-defined information needs, was developed via a science-based experimental design into a long-term (>10 y) watershed-scale monitoring program that integrated in-stream population/ community assessment, laboratory chronic bioassays, and fathead minnow full life-cycle assays as well as water quality and effluent quality monitoring and habitat assessment in addressing the presence of effluent effects. The 4 study streams (Codorus Creek, PA; Leaf River, MS; and the McKenzie and Willamette rivers, OR) represented both bleached and unbleached kraft mill processes and effluent concentrations that ranged from near typical for the United States (0.4%) to very high (Codorus Creek= 32%). Following 8 y of monitoring, the weight of evidence suggests an absence of biological differences at stations downstream of the mill discharges for periphyton or macroinvertebrates and, with the exception of 1 of 9 large-bodied fish and 1 of 7 small-bodied fish community structure metrics for 1 river (McKenzie), an absence of differences for fish communities. Laboratory bioassay and fathead minnow full-life cycle tests supported a substantial "margin of safety" in that, depending on the effluent, adverse responses did not occur until effluent concentrations were from 2 times to more than 150 times in-stream concentrations. The incorporation of a watershed spatial scale illustrated that each sample site tended to be unique over the 28 to 50 km monitored segments with respect to habitat and that knowledge of these variables permitted accurate evaluations of effluent effects. Similarly, the multiyear study framework provided information regarding the natural seasonal and year-to-year variability in fish communities and consequently a better understanding of how potential effluent effects signals could be expressed within this variability. The study incorporated an adaptive management strategy that provided for study design and monitoring modifications over time as a way of benefiting from practical experience and knowledge gained through time and to optimize the use of study resources. Results from this initial 8 y of monitoring, to our knowledge, represent the longest-known population/community-level assessment of the in-stream effects of pulp and paper mill effluents. Beyond the lessons learned with respect to effluent effects are those related to the esign and conduct of long-term watershed-scale studies that may be of use to others in developing watershed assessment or management programs.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.235 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations8
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntegrated Environmental Assessment and ManagementSame topicFish Ecology and Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207