MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3005393587 · doi:10.1080/23311843.2020.1724064

Effect of spirotetramat and 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic pesticides on two phytoplankton species ( <i>Monoraphidium griffithii</i> and <i>Coscinodiscus</i> sp.) in a single and compound mixture laboratory exposure

2020· article· en· W3005393587 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainable Environment · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Toxicology and Ecotoxicology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Universitaire de la Francophonie
KeywordsPhytoplanktonPesticideChlorophyllBiologyChlorophyll aBotanyChemistryEcologyNutrient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study was carried out to assess the chronic effects of both an insecticide (spirotetramat) and a herbicide (2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid) on two phytoplankton species: Monoraphidium griffithii and Coscinodiscus sp. The effects of the chemicals on an exponentially-growing population of the two species were evaluated using single compounds and a compound mixture. The experiments lasted for 27 days. The results show a decrease in the populations’ growth for both species after the application of single pesticides and the mixture. 2,4-D applied alone and the mixture of both chemicals have affected the organisms the most. Both pesticides have induced an increase in chlorophyll-a content in M. griffithii while no effect was observed on chlorophyll-a in Coscinodiscus sp. A significant effect was recorded in the cell size of both species with both pesticides. The two spirotetramat tested concentrations have induced an increase in cell size, while the opposite effect was obtained for the (2,4-D) herbicide concentrations. The mixture of compounds induced an additive effect on the cell size of both species. These results indicate the risk which the two chemicals represent in a natural environment. They are agents that can have chronic impairments at the physiology or behavior level of such phytoplankton species as M. griffithii or Coscinodiscus sp. Such impairments might consequently affect the health of the ecosystem.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.184 · 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