MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774659704 · doi:10.1080/23311843.2017.1412153

Assessment of pollution levels, potential ecological risk and human health risk of heavy metals/metalloids in dust around fuel filling stations from the Kumasi Metropolis, Ghana

2017· article· en· W2774659704 on OpenAlexafffund
Marian Asantewah Nkansah, Godfred Darko, Matt Dodd, Francis Opoku, Thomas Bentum Essuman, Joshua Antwi-Boasiako

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainable Environment · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy metals in environment
Canadian institutionsRoyal Roads University
FundersRoyal Roads University
KeywordsMetalloidPollutionEnvironmental chemistryHazard quotientIngestionEnvironmental scienceHeavy metalsChemistryMetallurgyMetalMaterials scienceEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to evaluate the levels of selected heavy metals/metalloids in filling station dust from the Kumasi Metropolis, Ghana. A total of forty (40) dust samples were analysed for Fe, Ti, Zn, Zr, Mn, Sr, Ba, Cr, Pd, Ni, Cu, As and Mo using X-ray Fluorescence technique. Mean concentrations of Ba, As, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn, Mo, Ni, Pb, Sr, Ti, Zn and Zr were 92.26, 6.20, 70.41, 50.18, 466.22, 163.68, 4.63, 44.05, 46.93, 106.69, 327.51, 280.32 and 182.05 mg/kg, respectively. The pollution index (PI) and geo-accumulation (Igeo) index values were in the order of Ba < Mn < Sr < Zr < Cu < Cr < Ni < Mo < As < Zn < Pb < Fe < Ti. The pollution load index had a mean of 2.20, signifying moderate pollution. Higher PI and Igeo value for Pb, Fe and Ti indicated high pollution. The PCA analysis identified anthropogenic inputs and natural origin as the main sources of pollution in filling station dust. The potential ecological risk index decreased as follows: As > Pb > Ni > Cu > Cr > Zn > Mn > Ba. The contribution of hazard quotient via ingestion for most of the heavy metals/metalloids were high with 11.83% for adults and 88.17% for children. For health risk assessment, non-carcinogenic values were below the threshold values, except hazard index via ingestion. The main exposure pathway for both children and adults was ingestion, followed by dermal contact and inhalation.

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)0.000
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Citations49
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainable EnvironmentSame topicHeavy metals in environmentFrench-language works237,207