MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Factors influencing the occurrence and distribution of neonicotinoid insecticides in surface waters of southern Ontario, Canada

2016· article· en· W2557928380 on OpenAlexaffabout
John Struger, Josey Grabuski, Steve Cagampan, Ed Sverko, Daryl J. McGoldrick, Christopher H. Marvin

Bibliographic record

VenueChemosphere · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeonicotinoidClothianidinImidaclopridEnvironmental scienceThiamethoxamSurface waterAgricultureHydrology (agriculture)PesticideEcologyBiologyEnvironmental engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The widespread use of neonicotinoid insecticides and recent increased regulatory scrutiny requires the generation of monitoring data with sufficient scope and resolution to provide decision makers with a better understanding of occurrence and distribution in the environment. This study presents a wide-scale investigation of neonicotinoid insecticides used across the range of agricultural activities from fifteen surface water sites in southern Ontario. Using statistical analysis, the correlation of individual compounds with land use was investigated, and the relationship between neonicotinoid occurrence and hydrologic parameters in calibrated water courses was also assessed. Of the five neonicotinoids studied, imidacloprid, clothianidin and thiamethoxam exhibited detection rates above 90% at over half the sites sampled over a three year period (2012-2014). At two sites in southwestern Ontario, the Canadian Federal freshwater guideline value for imidacloprid (230 ng/L) was exceeded in roughly 75% of the samples collected. For some watersheds, there were correlations between the occurrence of neonicotinoids and precipitation and/or stream discharge. Some watersheds exhibited seasonal maxima in concentrations of neonicotinoids in spring and fall, particularly for those areas where row crop agriculture is predominant; these seasonal patterns were absent in some areas characterized by a broad range of agricultural activities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.184 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations206
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemosphereSame topicInsect and Pesticide ResearchFrench-language works237,207