MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2417668278 · doi:10.12943/anr.2013.00013

Biota-Sediment Accumulation Factors (BSAF) for Radionuclides and Sediment Associated Biota of the Ottawa River

2013· article· en· W2417668278 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAECL Nuclear Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRadioactive contamination and transfer
Canadian institutionsAtomic Energy (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiotaOutfallSedimentEnvironmental scienceBenthic zoneRadionuclideTrophic levelEnvironmental chemistryBioaccumulationInvertebrateHydrology (agriculture)EcologyGeologyChemistryBiologyEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As Ottawa River contamination is historical and resides in sediment, ecological risk and trophic transfer depend on linkages between sediment and biota. One of the ways in which this linkage is quantified is through the use of the biota sediment accumulation factor (BSAF). In this study, we present the first field estimates of BSAF for a number of radionuclides. The strongest and most consistent BSAFs were those for 137 Cs in deposit feeding taxa, suggesting that sediment concentrations rather than dissolved concentrations drive uptake. For crayfish and unionid bivalves that do not feed on sediment, biota radionuclide concentrations were not related to sediment concentrations, but rather reflected concentrations in water. BSAFs would not be appropriate for these non-deposit feeding biota. BSAFs for 137 Cs were not significantly different among deposit feeding taxa, suggesting similar processes for ingestion, assimilation and elimination. These data also show that the concentration factor approach used for guidance would have led to spurious results in this study for deposit feeding benthic invertebrates. Concentrations of 137 Cs in Hexagenia downstream of the CRL process outfall range by about 2-orders of magnitude, in comparison to relatively uniform water concentrations. The concentration factor approach would have predicted a single value downstream of CRL, underestimating exposure to Hexagenia by almost 2-orders of magnitude at sites close to the CRL process outfall.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.483
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.231 · 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