Bioaccumulation of Selected Halogenated Organic Flame Retardants in Lake Ontario
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The trophic magnification of polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) and selected nonlegacy halogenated organic compounds (HOCs) was determined in the food web of Lake Ontario (ON, Canada). In all, 28 Br3-Br8-PBDEs and 24 HOCs (10 of which had not been targeted previously) were analyzed. Average concentrations of Σ28PBDEs in fish ranged between 79.7 ± 54.2 ng/g lipid weight in alewife (Alosa pseudoharengus) and 815 ± 695 ng/g lipid weight in lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush). For invertebrates, concentrations were between 13.4 ng/g lipid weight (net plankton; >110 μm) and 41.9 ng/g lipid weight in Diaporeia (Diaporeia hoyi). Detection frequency (DF) for HOCs was highest for anti-Dechlorane Plus (anti-DDC-CO), 1,3-diiodobenzene (1,3-DiiB), tribromo-methoxy-methylbenzene (ME-TBP), allyl 2,4,6-tribromophenyl ether (TBP-AE), pentabromocyclododecene (PBCYD), α+β-tetrabromocylcooctane (TBCO), 2-bromoallyl 2,4,6-tribromophenyl ether (BATE), and pentabromotoluene (PBT; DF for all = 100% in lake trout). Tetrabromoxylene (TBX), dibromopropyl 2,4,6-tribromophenyl ether (TBP-DBPE), and syn-DDC-CO were also frequently detected in trout (DF = 70–78%), whereas 2,3,4,5,6-pentabromoethyl benzene (PBEB) was detected only in plankton. Several HOCs were reported in aquatic biota in the Great Lakes (USA/Canada) for the first time in the present study, including PBCYD, 1,3DiiB, BATE, TBP-DBPE, PBT, α + β-TBCO, and ME-TBP. The Br4-6-BDEs (−47, −85, −99, −100, −153, and −154) all had prey-weighted biomagnification factors (BMFPW) values >6, whereas BMFPW values for Br7-8-BDEs were <1. The highest BMFPW values of non-PBDEs were for TBP-DBPE (10.6 ± 1.34) and ME-TBP (4.88 ± 0.60), whereas TBP-AE had a BMFPW value of <1. Significant (p≤ 0.05) trophic magnification factors (TMFs), both positive and negative, were found for Br4-8-BDEs (BDE 196 = 0.4; BDE 154 = 9.5) and for bis(2,4,6-tribromophenoxy)ethane (BTBPE; 0.53), PBCYD (1.8), 1,3-DiiB (0.33), and pentabromobenzene (PBB; 0.25). Food chain length was found to have a significant influence on the TMF values. Environ Toxicol Chem 2019;38:1198–1210. © 2019 SETAC Abstract
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".