A refined ecological risk assessment for California red-legged frog, Delta smelt, and California tiger salamander exposed to malathion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The California red-legged frog (CRLF), Delta smelt (DS), and California tiger salamander (CTS) are 3 species listed under the United States Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), all of which inhabit aquatic ecosystems in California. The US Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has conducted deterministic screening-level risk assessments for these species potentially exposed to malathion, an organophosphorus insecticide and acaricide. Results from our screening-level analyses identified potential risk of direct effects to DS as well as indirect effects to all 3 species via reduction in prey. Accordingly, for those species and scenarios in which risk was identified at the screening level, we conducted a refined probabilistic risk assessment for CRLF, DS, and CTS. The refined ecological risk assessment (ERA) was conducted using best available data and approaches, as recommended by the 2013 National Research Council (NRC) report "Assessing Risks to Endangered and Threatened Species from Pesticides." Refined aquatic exposure models including the Pesticide Root Zone Model (PRZM), the Vegetative Filter Strip Modeling System (VFSMOD), the Variable Volume Water Model (VVWM), the Exposure Analysis Modeling System (EXAMS), and the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) were used to generate estimated exposure concentrations (EECs) for malathion based on worst-case scenarios in California. Refined effects analyses involved developing concentration-response curves for fish and species sensitivity distributions (SSDs) for fish and aquatic invertebrates. Quantitative risk curves, field and mesocosm studies, surface-water monitoring data, and incident reports were considered in a weight-of-evidence approach. Currently, labeled uses of malathion are not expected to result in direct effects to CRLF, DS or CTS, or indirect effects due to effects on fish and invertebrate prey. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2018;14:224-239. © 2017 The Authors. Integrated Environmental Assessment and Management published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of Society of Environmental Toxicology & Chemistry (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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".