Creation of a Curated Aquatic Toxicology Database: EnviroTox
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Flexible, rapid, and predictive approaches that do not require the use of large numbers of vertebrate test animals are needed because the chemical universe remains largely untested for potential hazards. Development of robust new approach methodologies and nontesting approaches requires the use of existing information via curated, integrated data sets. The ecological threshold of toxicological concern (ecoTTC) represents one such new approach methodology that can predict a conservative de minimis toxicity value for chemicals with little or no information available. For the creation of an ecoTTC tool, a large, diverse environmental data set was developed from multiple sources, with harmonization, characterization, and information quality assessment steps to ensure that the information could be effectively organized and mined. The resulting EnviroTox database contains 91 217 aquatic toxicity records representing 1563 species and 4016 unique Chemical Abstracts Service numbers and is a robust, curated database containing high-quality aquatic toxicity studies that are traceable to the original information source. Chemical-specific information is also linked to each record and includes physico-chemical information, chemical descriptors, and mode of action classifications. Toxicity data are associated with the physico-chemical data, mode of action classifications, and curated taxonomic information for the organisms tested. The EnviroTox platform also includes 3 analysis tools: a predicted-no-effect concentration calculator, an ecoTTC distribution tool, and a chemical toxicity distribution tool. Although the EnviroTox database and tools were originally developed to support ecoTTC analysis and development, they have broader applicability to the field of ecological risk assessment. Environ Toxicol Chem 2019;9999:1-12. © 2019 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of 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 | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.016 |
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".