Health Impact Assessment of Sulfolane on Embryonic Development of Zebrafish (Danio rerio)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sulfolane is a widely used polar, aprotic solvent that has been detected by chemical analysis in groundwater and creeks around the world including Alberta, Canada (800 µg/mL), Louisiana, USA (2900 µg/mL) and Brisbane, Australia (4344 µg/mL). Previous research provided information on adverse effects of sulfolane on mammals, but relatively little information is available on aquatic organisms. This study tested the effects of sulfolane (0–5000 µg/mL) on early development of zebrafish larvae, using various morphometric (survival, hatching, yolk sac and pericardial oedema, haemorrhaging, spinal malformations, swim bladder inflation), growth (larval length, eye volume, yolk sac utilisation), behavioural (touch response, locomotor activity and transcript abundance parameters (ahr1a, cyp1a, thraa, dio1, dio2, dio3, 11βhsd2, gr, aqp3a, cyp19a1b, ddc, gria2b and hsp70) for 120 h. Embryos were chronically exposed to sulfolane throughout the experimental period. For locomotor activity, however, we also investigated acute response to 2-h sulfolane treatment. Sulfolane sensitivity causing significant impairment in the observed parameters were different depending on parameters measured, including survival (concentrations greater than 800 µg/mL), morphometric and growth (800–1000 µg/mL), behaviour (500–800 µg/mL) and transcript abundance (10 µg/mL). The overall results provide novel information on the adverse health impacts of sulfolane on an aquatic vertebrate species, and an insight into developmental impairments following exposure to environmental levels of sulfolane in fish embryos.
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) | 0.001 | 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".