MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921467595 · doi:10.2166/wqrj.2000.035

Local Impacts of Coal Mines and Power Plants across Canada. II. Metals, Organics and Toxicity in Sediments

2000· article· en· W2921467595 on OpenAlexaffabout
V. Cheam, Trefor B. Reynoldson, G. Garbai, J. Rajkumar, Danielle Milani

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Quality Research Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicThallium and Germanium Studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHyalella aztecaTubifex tubifexSedimentEnvironmental chemistryEnvironmental scienceEcologyGeologyChemistryBiologyAmphipoda

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A Canada-wide survey was undertaken to study local impacts of coal mines and coal-fired electrical generating stations. The first part dealt with thallium in waters and sediments. This, Fart II, deals with metals and organics in sediments as well as sediment toxicity to four different organisms. Several elevated metal and PAH concentrations as well as high toxicity (based on biological sediment guidelines) were observed compared to uncontaminated sites. Based on Ontario's sediment guidelines, most of the studied sediments fell in the "marginally to significantly polluted" category of sediment quality, although two belonged to the "grossly polluted" class due to the extremely high concentrations of some metals. The observed diversity of PAHs and near-unity carbon preference indices indicate non-biological origins of the studied sediments. In this initial study, four different organisms, Chironomus riparius, Hyalella azteca, Hexagenia spp. (Hexagenia limbata) and Tubifex tubifex were used to determine sediment toxicity, which showed 50% of the tested sites were highly stressed.

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 score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.308 · 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

Citations18
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Quality Research JournalSame topicThallium and Germanium StudiesFrench-language works237,207