Application of the Target Lipid Model and Passive Samplers to Characterize the Toxicity of Bioavailable Organics in Oil Sands Process-Affected Water
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oil sand operations in Alberta, Canada will eventually include returning treated process-affected waters to the environment. Organic constituents in oil sand process-affected water (OSPW) represent complex mixtures of nonionic and ionic (e.g., naphthenic acids) compounds, and compositions can vary spatially and temporally, which has impeded development of water quality benchmarks. To address this challenge, it was hypothesized that solid phase microextraction fibers coated with polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) could be used as a biomimetic extraction (BE) to measure bioavailable organics in OSPW. Organic constituents of OSPW were assumed to contribute additively to toxicity, and partitioning to PDMS was assumed to be predictive of accumulation in target lipids, which were the presumed site of action. This method was tested using toxicity data for individual model compounds, defined mixtures, and organic mixtures extracted from OSPW. Toxicity was correlated with BE data, which supports the use of this method in hazard assessments of acute lethality to aquatic organisms. A species sensitivity distribution (SSD), based on target lipid model and BE values, was similar to SSDs based on residues in tissues for both nonionic and ionic organics. BE was shown to be an analytical tool that accounts for bioaccumulation of organic compound mixtures from which toxicity can be predicted, with the potential to aid in the development of water quality guidelines.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".