Potency of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) for Induction of Ethoxyresorufin-<i>O</i>-deethylase (EROD) Activity in Hepatocyte Cultures from Chicken, Pekin Duck, And Greater Scaup
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The potency of tetrachlorodibenzo-p-dioxin (TCDD) and 18 polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) for induction of ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase (EROD) activity was assessed in primary hepatocyte cultures prepared from chicken (Gallus domesticus), Pekin duck (Anas platyrhynchos domesticus), and greater scaup (Aythya marila). TCDD and 8 of the PAHs induced EROD activity in a concentration-dependent manner. Seven of these were previously shown to be acutely toxic to avian embryos, while the 10 congeners that did not produce an EROD response caused limited mortality. The rank order potency of the EROD-active congeners in all three species was as follows: TCDD>dibenz[ah]anthracene>benzo[k]fluoranthene>indeno[1,2,3-cd]pyrene>benzo[a]pyrene>chrysene≈benz[a]anthracene≈benz[ghi]perylene>benzo[b]naphtho[2,3-d]thiophene. Chicken hepatoctyes were more sensitive than duck hepatocytes to EROD induction by all test compounds, but the gap in species sensitivity was 100-fold for TCDD, and generally ≤10-fold for PAHs. This study is the first to use in vitro methods to rank the AHR-mediated potency of PAHs in birds. These data may be useful for assessing risks associated with exposure to PAHs in the environment.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".