Assessing the bioaccumulation potential of ionizable organic compounds: Current knowledge and research priorities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of the present study was to review the current knowledge regarding the bioaccumulation potential of ionizable organic compounds (IOCs), with a focus on the availability of empirical data for fish. Aspects of the bioaccumulation potential of IOCs in fish that can be characterized relatively well include the pH dependence of gill uptake and elimination, uptake in the gut, and sorption to phospholipids (membrane-water partitioning). Key challenges include the lack of empirical data for biotransformation and binding in plasma. Fish possess a diverse array of proteins that may transport IOCs across cell membranes. Except in a few cases, however, the significance of this transport for uptake and accumulation of environmental contaminants is unknown. Two case studies are presented. The first describes modeled effects of pH and biotransformation on the bioconcentration of organic acids and bases, while the second employs an updated model to investigate factors responsible for accumulation of perfluorinated alkyl acids. The perfluorinated alkyl acid case study is notable insofar as it illustrates the likely importance of membrane transporters in the kidney and highlights the potential value of read-across approaches. Recognizing the current need to perform bioaccumulation hazard assessments and ecological and exposure risk assessment for IOCs, the authors provide a tiered strategy that progresses (as needed) from conservative assumptions (models and associated data) to more sophisticated models requiring chemical-specific information. Environ Toxicol Chem 2017;36:882-897. © 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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".