MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3007137746 · doi:10.1016/j.ecolind.2020.106240

Snail as sentinel organism for monitoring the environmental pollution; a review

2020· review· en· W3007137746 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Firas Baroudi, Joséphine Al-Alam, Ziad Fajloun, Maurice Millet

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Indicators · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversité LibanaiseUniversité de StrasbourgAgence Universitaire de la Francophonie
KeywordsPollutionEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryExtraction (chemistry)ContaminationEnvironmental pollutionWater pollutionOrganismSentinel speciesBiodiversityEnvironmental monitoringEnvironmental protectionEcologyBiologyEnvironmental engineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Environmental pollution, one of the most serious problems facing human health, ecosystems and biodiversity, is defined as the contamination of the physical and biological components of the atmosphere system which has harmful consequences for normal environmental processes. Animals, such as snails used as environmental pollution biomonitors, show multiple physiological mechanisms to counteract the effects of toxins in the environment due to their sensitivity to various contaminants and their ability to accumulate them through their tissues. The objective of this review is to explore the possibility of using different types of snails as potential and ideal monitoring matrices to assess air pollution and to detect heavy metal and POPs concentration by different extraction techniques including Soxhlet extraction, Accelerated Solvent Extraction, Solid Phase Extraction, Microwave-Assisted Extraction, Pressurized Hot Water extraction and Microwave Acid Digestion.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.284 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations120
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological IndicatorsSame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207