Effect of Lipid Partitioning on Predictions of Acute Toxicity of Oil Sands Process Affected Water to Embryos of Fathead Minnow (<i>Pimephales promelas</i>)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dissolved organic compounds in oil sands process affected water (OSPW) are known to be responsible for most of its toxicity to aquatic organisms, but the complexity of this mixture prevents use of traditional bottom-up approaches for predicting toxicities of mixtures. Therefore, a top-down approach to predict toxicity of the dissolved organic fraction of OSPW was developed and tested. Accurate masses (i.e., m/z) determined by ultrahigh resolution mass spectrometry in negative and positive ionization modes were used to assign empirical chemical formulas to each chemical species in the mixture. For each chemical species, a predictive measure of lipid accumulation was estimated by stir-bar sorptive extraction (SBSE) to poly(dimethyl)siloxane, or by partitioning to solid-supported lipid membranes (SSLM). A narcosis mode of action was assumed and the target-lipid model was used to estimate potencies of mixtures by assuming strict additivity. A model developed using a combination of the SBSE and SSLM lipid partitioning estimates, whereby the accumulation of chemicals to neutral and polar lipids was explicitly considered, was best for predicting empirical values of LC50 in 96-h acute toxicity tests with embryos of fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas). Model predictions were within 4-fold of observed toxicity for 75% of OSPW samples, and within 8.5-fold for all samples tested, which is comparable to the range of interlaboratory variability for in vivo toxicity testing.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".