Trophic Magnification of Organic Chemicals: A Global Synthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Production of organic chemicals (OCs) is increasing exponentially, and some OCs biomagnify through food webs to potentially toxic levels. Biomagnification under field conditions is best described by trophic magnification factors (TMFs; per trophic level change in log-concentration of a chemical) which have been measured for more than two decades. Syntheses of TMF behavior relative to chemical traits and ecosystem properties are lacking. We analyzed >1500 TMFs to identify OCs predisposed to biomagnify and to assess ecosystem vulnerability. The highest TMFs were for OCs that are slowly metabolized by animals (metabolic rate kM < 0.01 day(-1)) and are moderately hydrophobic (log KOW 6-8). TMFs were more variable in marine than freshwaters, unrelated to latitude, and highest in food webs containing endotherms. We modeled the probability that any OC would biomagnify as a combined function of KOW and kM. Probability is greatest (∼100%) for slowly metabolized compounds, regardless of KOW, and lowest for chemicals with rapid transformation rates (kM > 0.2 day(-1)). This probabilistic model provides a new global tool for screening existing and new OCs for their biomagnification potential.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".