Major AhR-active chemicals in sediments of Lake Sihwa, South Korea: Application of effect-directed analysis combined with full-scan screening analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study utilized effect-directed analysis (EDA) combined with full-scan screening analysis (FSA) to identify aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AhR)-active compounds in sediments of inland creeks flowing into Lake Sihwa, South Korea. The specific objectives were to (i) investigate the major AhR-active fractions of organic extracts of sediments by using H4IIE-luc in vitro bioassay (4 h and 72 h exposures), (ii) quantify known AhR agonists, such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and styrene oligomers (SOs), (iii) identify unknown AhR agonists by use of gas chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight mass spectrometry (GC-QTOFMS), and (iv) determine contributions of AhR agonists to total potencies measured by use of the bioassay. FSA was conducted on fractions F2.6 and F2.7 (aromatics with log Kow 5–7) in extracts of sediment from Siheung Creek (industrial area). Those fractions exhibited significant AhR-mediated potency as well as relatively great concentrations of PAHs and SOs. FSA detected 461 and 449 compounds in F2.6 and F2.7, respectively. Of these, five tentative candidates of AhR agonist were selected based on NIST library matching, aromatic structures and numbers of rings, and available standards. Benz[b]anthracene, 11H-benzo[a]fluorene, and 4,5-methanochrysene exhibited significant AhR-mediated potency in the H4IIE-luc bioassay, and relative potencies of these compounds were determined. Potency balance analysis demonstrated that these three newly identified AhR agonists explained 1.1% to 67% of total induced AhR-mediated potencies of samples, which were particularly great for industrial sediments. Follow-up studies on sources and ecotoxicological effects of these compounds in coastal environments would be required.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.009 | 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 teacher head, 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".