MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2189180755

Occurrence of Cyclic Volatile Methylsiloxanes in Surface Waters

2014· article· en· W2189180755 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yu Zhang, Pınar Ömür-Özbek

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicOdor and Emission Control Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEffluentEuropean commissionEnvironmental chemistryWastewaterAquatic environmentContaminationEnvironmental scienceEuropean unionWaste managementChemistryBusinessEnvironmental engineeringEngineeringEcologyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cyclic volatile methylsiloxanes (cVMS) are commonly present in cosmetic and personal care products, healthcare products and many industrial applications. Because cVMS are persistent, they end up in the wastewater and go untreated through the wastewater treatment units, which lead to contamination of the surface waters through effluent discharge. The three most common cVMS are: octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4), decamethylcyclopentasiloxane (D5) and dodecamethylcyclohexasiloxane (D6). It was determined that D4 is very toxic to some aquatic organisms at very low concentrations of 6.3 ug/L, which meets the toxicity criterion of the European Commission. D4 was classified as Category 3 for reproductive toxicity by the European Commission. It was determined by Dow Corning Corporation that D5 showed a potential carcinogenic effect in a 2-year chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity study. cVMS are often measured by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry for precise measurement. In two UK rivers D5 was detected at <0.01-0.03 ug/L. A study from Canada reported <0.01-0.02 ug/L of D4, <0.03-1.45 ug/L of D5 and <0.02-0.15 ug/L of D6 in a river studied. Because these cVMSs were detected at considerable levels, they are under consideration by the UK Environment Agency and Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency for drinking water regulations and are declared as harmful to the environment by Environment Canada and Health Canada. This study focused on refining the available detection methods for cVMSs and to monitor the occurrence of them in local wastewater treatment plants. After refining a headspace chromatography/mass spectrometry method, 0.69 ug/L of D4 and 2.14 ug/L of D5, in the effluent from Drake Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF), Fort Collins, CO and 0.97 ug/L of D4 and 2.61 ug/L of D5 in the effluent from Loveland Wastewater Treatment Plant, Loveland, CO were detected. These results indicate that the surface waters receiving the effluents from these two WWTFs are likely to contain considerable amounts of D4 and D5.

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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicOdor and Emission Control TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207