MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2185318469 · doi:10.2166/wqrj.2008.020

Quantification of Plant Sterols in Pulp and Paper Mill Effluents

2008· article· en· W2185318469 on OpenAlexaff
Zahid Khan, Eric R. Hall

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Quality Research Journal · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCholesterol and Lipid Metabolism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCampesterolStigmasterolChemistryEffluentErgosterolSterolChromatographyPaper millGas chromatographyEnvironmental chemistryDerivatizationMass spectrometryBiochemistryCholesterolWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Pulp and paper mill effluents (PPMEs) may contain high levels of otherwise naturally occurring organic pollutants such as plant sterols, which are suspected endocrine disrupting chemicals. Exposure to such chemicals may cause various physiological and morphological abnormalities that have been reported in the fish and other aquatic life inhabiting PPME receiving waters. Plant sterols, or phytosterols, form a constituent of wood extractives that may be released into the effluents during the pulping and paper making processes. Isolation and analysis of sterols from the complex mixture of PPMEs is challenging and standard analytical protocols do not exist. The need for having a reliable method for analyzing a particular environmental contaminant such as plant sterols cannot be overemphasized. In the present study a technique was modified for reliable analysis of PPME sterols. The technique involves liquid-liquid extractions using methyl-t-butyl ether and trimethyl-silylation derivatizations of the extracted sterols. Identification and quantification of the PPME sterols were accomplished by gas chromatography and mass spectrometry. Analytical problems were resolved by conducting multiple extractions, drying the sterol extracts, and redissolving and silylating the extracts at an increased derivatization temperature of 70°C. This shortened the suggested incubation period from 12 to 4 h. The modified technique offered improved method sensitivity and reproducibility, and successfully quantified campesterol, β-sitosterol, β-sitostanol, stigmasterol, stigmastanol, cholesterol, and ergosterol in PPMEs. Primary and secondary treated PPMEs analyses suggested 800 ± 190 µg/L total sterols in primary effluents, and 211 ± 90 µg/L in biologically treated final effluents. β-Sitosterol, β-sitostanol, and campesterol alone accounted for about 80% of the total sterols. A general comparison of the sterols in primary and secondary effluents suggested about 73% removal across the secondary treatment systems sampled.

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
Bench or experimentalhigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Bench or experimentallow
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)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.655
Threshold uncertainty score0.299

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.233
GPT teacher head0.428
Teacher spread0.195 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations9
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Quality Research JournalSame topicCholesterol and Lipid MetabolismFrench-language works237,207