Evolutionary patterns and physicochemical properties explain macroinvertebrate sensitivity to heavy metals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ecological risk assessment depends strongly on species sensitivity data. Typically, sensitivity data are based on laboratory toxicity bioassays, which for practical constraints cannot be exhaustively performed for all species and chemicals available. Bilinear models integrating phylogenetic information of species and physicochemical properties of compounds allow to predict species sensitivity to chemicals. Combining the molecular information (DNA sequences) of 31 invertebrate species with the physicochemical properties of six bivalent metals, we built bilinear models that explained 70-80% of the variability in species sensitivity to heavy metals. Phylogeny was the most important component of the bilinear models, as it explained the major part of the explained variance (> 40%). Predicted values from bilinear modeling were in agreement with experimental values (> 50%); therefore, this approach is a good starting point to build statistical models which can potentially predict heavy metal toxicity for untested invertebrate species based on empirical values for similar species. Despite their good performance, development of the presented bilinear models would benefit from improved phylogenetic and toxicological datasets. Our analysis is an example for linking evolutionary biology with applied ecotoxicology. Its future applications may encompass other stress factors or traits influencing the survival of aquatic organisms in polluted environments.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".