Effects of habitat and pulp and paper mill contamination on a population of brook stickleback (Culaea inconstans)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study examined the responses of a population of brook stickleback (Culaea inconstans) exposed to pulp mill effluent at Jackfish Bay, Lake Superior, Canada, in May 2007 and May 2011. Brook stickleback were extirpated from the effluent-receiving site, presumably due to anoxia after this period. Females at the effluent-receiving site had significantly larger gonad sizes in 2007 and 2011. In 2011, effluent-exposed female gonadal development was significantly advanced when compared with reference sites; they were the second most mature when compared among three different reference sites. Analysis of 7-ethoxyresorufin-O-deethylase activity revealed that effluent-receiving site females had greater CYP1A induction in 2007 and significantly greater CYP1A induction in 2011. Effluent-receiving site males showed significantly reduced CYP1A induction in 2007 and significantly greater induction in 2011. Chemical evaluation of sediment from the receiving environment showed elevated levels of resin acids and the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon, retene. Higher condition factors and more mature gonads were consistent with higher winter and spring temperatures modified by effluent or by lake vs. stream environments. Overall, effects on effluent-exposed brook stickleback were not consistent with reported effects in white sucker exposed to the same effluent in previous studies. This article has been made Open Access thanks to the kind support of CAWQ/ACQE (https://www.cawq.ca).
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Observational | low |
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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".