MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2182700318 · doi:10.1021/bk-2003-0835.ch017

Dissolved Gaseous Mercury Profiles in Freshwaters

2002· book-chapter· en· W2182700318 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Steven D. Siciliano, Nelson J. O’Driscoll, D. R. S. Lean

Bibliographic record

VenueACS symposium series · 2002
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsThermoclineHypolimnionMercury (programming language)BayOceanographyEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryHydrology (agriculture)GeologyChemistryEcologyEutrophicationBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The importance of microbial processes for the regulation of dissolved gaseous mercury (DGM) in deep freshwaters has not been previously investigated. In this study, we evaluated microbial mercury reductase and oxidase activities in depth profiles from Jack's Lake. In addition, detailed DGM depth profiles were determined for four sampling stations on Lake Ontario. Our results illustrate that microbial processes are an important factor regulating DGM in the hypolimnion. Levels of DGM in William's Bay in Jack's Lake were 6 times higher than that observed at Brooke's Bay. This was accompanied by a 10 fold reduction in mercury oxidase activity in William's Bay. When DGM concentrations are expressed on an aerial basis, DGM concentrations above the thermocline in Lake Ontario average 1.5 ng DGM m-2 and in small freshwater lakes it ranged between 0.1 and 0.8 ng DGM m-2. Further, it was demonstrated that the majority of DGM in large freshwater lakes such as Lake Ontario exists below the thermocline where photochemical oxidation and reduction processes cannot occur. The importance of this DGM to atmospheric flux rates is discussed.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.330
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.201 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations7
Published2002
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS symposium seriesSame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207