Ecological risk assessment for aquatic invertebrate communities exposed to imidacloprid as a result of labeled agricultural and nonagricultural uses in the United States
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A probabilistic ecological risk assessment (ERA) was conducted to determine the potential effects of acute and chronic exposure of aquatic invertebrate communities to imidacloprid arising from labeled agricultural and nonagricultural uses in the United States. Aquatic exposure estimates were derived using a higher-tier refined modeling approach that accounts for realistic variability in environmental and agronomic factors. Toxicity was assessed using refined acute and chronic community-level effect metrics for aquatic invertebrates (i.e., species or taxon sensitivity distributions) developed using the best available data. Acute and chronic probabilistic risk estimates were derived by integrating the exposure distributions for different use patterns with the applicable species or taxon sensitivity distributions to generate risk curves, which plot cumulative probability of exceedance versus the magnitude of effect. Overall, the results of this assessment indicated that the aquatic invertebrate community is unlikely to be adversely affected by acute or chronic exposure to imidacloprid resulting from currently registered uses of imidacloprid in the United States. Environ Toxicol Chem 2017;36:1375-1388. © 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".