MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169286004 · doi:10.1897/02-643

Bioconcentration of inorganic and organic thallium by freshwater phytoplankton

2004· article· en· W2169286004 on OpenAlexaff
Michael R. Twiss, Benjamin S. Twining, Nicholas S. Fisher

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Toxicology and Chemistry · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicThallium and Germanium Studies
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBioconcentrationPhytoplanktonEnvironmental chemistryThalliumBioaccumulationEnvironmental scienceChemistryEcologyBiologyNutrientInorganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Uptake of inorganic Tl(I) and dimethylthallium, (CH3)2Tl+, by Chlorella spp. (Chlorophyta) and the diatom Stephanodiscus hantzschii (Heterokontophyta) were measured using radio-tracer techniques in water from Lakes Erie and Superior (North America). Uptake of both Tl(I) and dimethylthallium was bioactive. Uptake of [204Tl]-Tl(I) was greater in Lake Superior water than in Lake Erie water due to the greater K content in Lake Erie that inhibits Tl(I) uptake by phytoplankton but not that of [204Tl]-dimethylthallium. Volume-based bioconcentration factors for Tl(I) after 72 h of exposure were 5 x 10(4) and 1.1 x 10(4) for Chlorella sp. and S. hantzschii; for dimethylthallium they were 7.8 x 10(2) and 8.3 x 10(3). Both Tl(I) and Tl(III) were concentrated similarly by Chlorella spp. These results suggest that chlorophytes, but not diatoms, accumulate Tl(I) to a greater extent than dimethylthallium. Greater bioaccumulation factors of inorganic Tl are possible in waters containing low amounts of K+; water quality guidelines seeking to protect biota from deleterious effects of Tl should consider the role of K.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Citations36
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Toxicology and ChemistrySame topicThallium and Germanium StudiesFrench-language works237,207