Modeling cadmium accumulation in indigenous yellow perch (Perca flavescens)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We used field data from transplantation and caging studies with juvenile yellow perch ( Perca flavescens ) to test a kinetic bioaccumulation model for cadmium (Cd). The model, which considers both dietary and aqueous sources of Cd, was first used to predict the dynamics of Cd accumulation in perch exposed to high ambient Cd for 70 days. Model simulations for hepatic Cd agreed well with the observed time course of Cd accumulation in the liver, but for the gills and gut, the predicted accumulations after 70 days were about three times higher than the observed values, suggesting that these latter organs can alter their ability to take up and (or) eliminate Cd. The model was also used to predict steady-state Cd concentrations in the gills, gut, and liver of perch living in lakes along a Cd gradient. Agreement between predicted and observed steady-state Cd concentrations was reasonable in lakes with low to moderate Cd concentrations, but in lakes with high dissolved Cd (>1.5 nmol·L–1), the model overestimated Cd accumulation, particularly in the gills and gut. These results suggest that kinetic bioaccumulation models may better apply to some organs than to others. Because metal-induced toxicity is normally organ-specific, their application in a risk assessment context should be undertaken with caution.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".