Responses in a Fathead Minnow (Pimephales promelas) Lifecycle Test and in Wild White Sucker (Catostomus commersoni) Exposed to a Canadian Bleached Kraft Mill Effluent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To evaluate currently available bioassays for their use in investigating the causes of pulp and paper mill effluent effects on fish reproduction, the responses of wild white sucker (Catostomus commersoni) collected from the receiving environment at the bleached kraft mill at La Tuque, Quebec, were compared with responses of fathead minnow (Pimephales promelas) exposed to effluent in a laboratory lifecycle test. White sucker collected at effluent exposed sites had increased liver size but none of the reproductive effects that had been documented in earlier field studies at this site. Exposure to 1, 3, 10, 30, and 100% bleached kraft mill effluent (BKME) in the lab led to significantly decreased length, but increased weight and liver size in male fathead minnow. Female length was also decreased and liver size was increased at high effluent exposures. Most effluent concentrations (1 to 30%) significantly increased egg production compared with controls. The fathead minnow lifecycle assay mirrored the effects seen in wild fish captured downstream of the BKME discharge. These results will be used to select short-term fish tests for investigating the causes of and solutions to the effects of mill effluents on fish reproduction.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".