MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2767230535 · doi:10.3390/w9110877

Survey of Heavy Metal Contamination in Water Sources in the Municipality of Torola, El Salvador, through In Situ Sorbent Extraction

2017· article· en· W2767230535 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Enriqueta Anticó, Sergi Cot, Alexandre Ribó, Ignasi Rodríguez‐Roda, Cláudia Fontàs

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy metals in environment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsSorbentContaminationEnvironmental chemistryWater qualityExtraction (chemistry)Environmental sciencePollutantHeavy metalsWater contaminationAdsorptionChemistryChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of heavy metals in water resources directly affects consumer health. The quality of surface water resources in Central America is usually low due to the presence of metals and other pollutants. The lack of analytical instrumentation to perform routine monitoring of water has encouraged the development of easy tools to facilitate the determination of heavy metals in waters in remote sites. In this study, we evaluated the use of different sorbents, such as Adsorbsia As600 (titanium dioxide), Iontosorb Oxin, 8-hydroxyquinoline bearing functional groups, and Duolite GT-73, with thiol functionality, for Cd, Ni, Cu, Zn, and Al extraction. It was found that both Adsorbsia As600 and Iontosorb Oxin allowed the adsorption of all metals, and the recovery was achieved using either HCl or ethylenediaminetetraacetic sodium salt (EDTA) solutions. Hence, Adsorbsia As600 was employed for in situ sampling in the metal contamination evaluation of water samples (from 15 wells and nine storage tanks) from the municipality of Torola, Mozarán, El Salvador. The developed procedure allowed all the metals in the samples to be detected, and Ni and Al were found to be above Salvadoran guidelines for drinking water quality.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.956

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations11
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicHeavy metals in environmentFrench-language works237,207