Identification of Estrogenic Compounds in Oil Sands Process Waters by Effect Directed Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using effect directed analysis, the presence of estrogenic components in untreated and biologically treated oil sands process water (OSPW) was detected with the yeast estrogenic screening assay after fractionation with solid phase extraction followed by reversed phase high performance liquid chromatography. Comparison of the composition, as determined by electrospray ionization combined with high-resolution linear trap quadropole (LTQ)-Orbitrap Velos Pro hybrid mass spectrometry (negative ion) of selected estrogenic and nonestrogenic fractions identified compounds that were uniquely present in the estrogenic samples, biologically treated and untreated. Of the 30 most abundant compounds, there were 14 possible nonaromatic structures and 16 possible aromatic structures. Based on the published literature, the latter are the most likely to cause estrogenicity and were O2, O3 and O4 C17 to C20 compounds with double bond equivalents between 6 and 10 and chemical formulas similar to estrone- and estradiol-like compounds. This study shows exact formulas and masses of possible estrogenic compounds in OSPW. These findings will help to focus study on the most environmentally significant components in OSPW.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".