MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2411970283 · doi:10.1002/etc.3384

Is received dose from ingested soil independent of soil PAH concentrations?—Animal model results

2016· article· en· W2411970283 on OpenAlexafffund
Rachel E. Peters, Kyle James, Mark Cave, Mark Wickstrom, Steven D. Siciliano

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Toxicology and Chemistry · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Canadian institutionsSoilVision Systems (Canada)University of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UK
KeywordsBioavailabilitySoil waterEnvironmental chemistryPyrenePolycyclic aromatic hydrocarbonChemistryAnthraceneEnvironmental scienceSoil scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) bioavailability from ingested soils will vary between soils; however, the nature of this variation is not well characterized. A juvenile swine model was used to link external exposure to internal benzo[a]pyrene (BaP) and anthracene exposure following oral PAH ingestion of 27 different impacted site soils, soots, or spiked artificial soils. Internal exposure of BaP and anthracene, represented by area under the plasma-time curve, did not relate to soil concentration in impacted site soils, but did relate in spiked artificial soil. Point of departure modeling identified soil PAH concentrations greater than 1900 mg kg(-1) as the point where area under the curve becomes proportional to external dose. A BaP internal exposure below 1900 mg kg(-1) had an upper 95% confidence interval estimate of 33% of external exposure. Weak relationships between soil:simulated gastrointestinal fluid PAH partitioning and area under the curve values suggest that differences in internal PAH exposure between soils may not be dominated by differences in PAH partitioning. The data seem to best support exposure assessment assuming constant internal PAH exposure below soil concentrations of 1900 mg kg(-1) . However, because constant internal exposure would challenge several existing paradigms, a bioavailability estimate of 33% of the external exposure is suggested as a likely workable solution. Environ Toxicol Chem 2016;35:2261-2269. © 2016 SETAC.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Toxicology and Chemistry→Same topicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact→French-language works237,207→