MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162431739 · doi:10.1039/b403169e

Baseline survey of concentrations of toxaphene congeners in fish from European waters

2004· article· en· W2162431739 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Brendan McHugh, Evin McGovern, Eugene R. Nixon, Jarle Klungsøyr, Gerhard Rimkus, P.E.G. Leonards, J. de Boer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Monitoring · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsToxapheneHalibutEuropean unionFisheryFish <Actinopterygii>Environmental scienceBiologyPesticideEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The European Union project "Investigation into the monitoring, analysis and toxicity of toxaphene"(MATT) began in 1997 involving participants from the Netherlands, Ireland, Norway and Germany. Concentration information, analytical methodology and statistical interpretation of 207 samples covering 23 different fish species from European waters are presented for three toxaphene indicator congeners: CHBs 26, 50 and 62 (CHB = chlorobornane). Concentrations for the Sigma3CHBs were more elevated in fish from more northern latitudes, such as the Barents and Norwegian Sea, compared to fish from Irish, Dutch and German waters. Concentrations were lowest in shellfish and in fish species having low lipid content and were highest in medium/high lipid species. Females from a number of fish species were shown to contain significantly higher concentrations than those observed in male fish. Overall no samples were shown to exceed existing German MRL legislation, with only one Greenland halibut sample shown to exceed Canadian TDI recommendations.

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 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 score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations6
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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