The Benefits of Biotreatment for Reducing the Effects of Pulp and Paper Mill Effluents on Fish Reproduction in Laboratory Tests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Pulp and paper mill effluents have been reported to cause changes in reproductive indicators of fish in laboratory and field studies. These changes include reduced egg production and gonad size, and altered hormone levels and expression of secondary sex characteristics. We examined the performance of biotreatment plants for their potential in abating effects of pulp and paper mill effluents on fish reproduction under laboratory conditions. A bleached kraft mill effluent (BKME) treated in an aerated lagoon and a thermomechanical pulp mill effluent (TMPE) treated by aerobic sludge in a sequential batch reactor were selected for study. Mature fathead minnows (Pimephales promelas) were exposed to effluents before and after biotreatment under continuous renewal conditions for 21 days. Egg production was monitored daily, while morphometric parameters (length, weight, gonad size), secondary sexual characteristics, and steroid hormone and vitellogenin levels were measured at the end of the effluent exposure. The effluent from both mills before biotreatment impaired the reproductive capacity of minnows (egg production) at concentrations of 10 and 20% vol/vol, but not at 2% vol/vol. Exposure to biotreated effluents from both mills at concentrations of 2, 10, 20, and 40% vol/vol caused no significant differences in overall reproductive capacity of minnows as compared with controls. These results indicate that biotreatment can significantly improve the quality of a BKME and an effluent from a TMP mill with respect to the reproductive capacity of fish as determined in laboratory tests.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Bench or experimental | high |
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".