MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3024035312 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.0c01848

Two Decades of Mercury Concentrations in Barents Sea Polar Bears (<i>Ursus maritimus</i>) in Relation to Dietary Carbon, Sulfur, and Nitrogen

2020· article· en· W3024035312 on OpenAlexaff
Anna Lippold, Jon Aars, Magnus Andersen, Aurore Aubail, Andrew E. Derocher, Runé Dietz, Igor Eulaers, Christian Sonne, J. M. Welker, Øystein Wiig, Heli Routti

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNorsk PolarinstituttKlima- og miljødepartementetWorld Wildlife Fund
KeywordsUrsus maritimusMercury (programming language)SulfurPolarEnvironmental chemistryNitrogenCarbon fibersChemistryEcologyEnvironmental scienceBiologyArctic

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Temporal trends of total mercury (THg) were examined in female polar bear (Ursus maritimus) hair (n = 199) from the Barents Sea in 1995–2016. In addition, hair values of stable isotopes (n = 190–197) of carbon (δ13C), sulfur (δ34S), and nitrogen (δ15N) and information on breeding status, body condition, and age were obtained. Stable isotope values of carbon and sulfur reflect dietary source (e.g., marine vs terrestrial) and the nitrogen trophic level. Values for δ13C and δ34S declined by −1.62 and −1.18‰ over the time of the study period, respectively, while values for δ15N showed no trend. Total Hg concentrations were positively related to both δ13C and δ34S. Yearly median THg concentrations ranged from 1.61 to 2.75 μg/g and increased nonlinearly by 0.86 μg/g in total over the study. Correcting THg concentrations for stable isotope values of carbon and sulfur and additionally breeding status and age slightly accelerated the increase in THg concentrations; however, confidence intervals of the raw THg trend and the corrected THg trend had substantial overlap. The rise in THg concentrations in the polar bear food web was possibly related to climate-related re-emissions of previously stored Hg from thawing sea-ice, glaciers, and permafrost.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations24
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & Technology→Same topicMercury impact and mitigation studies→French-language works237,207→