MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107976977 · doi:10.2166/aqua.2020.086

Effectiveness of peracetic acid and EarthTec QZ for controlling zebra and quagga mussels in drinking water treatment plants on Lake Ontario

2020· article· en· W3107976977 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alonso Hurtado, Carlos Alonzo-Moya, Ronald Hofmann

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Water Supply Research and Technology—AQUA · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and Behavior
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeracetic acidMusselChlorineZebra musselDreissenaVeligerChemistryEnvironmental chemistryWater treatmentEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental engineeringBivalviaFisheryMolluscaEcologyBiologyHydrogen peroxide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Prechlorination is the most common strategy for zebra and quagga mussel control in drinking water treatment plant intakes in the Great Lakes region. Although effective and inexpensive, chlorine can form regulated disinfection byproducts. Two potential alternatives to prechlorination were evaluated for mussel control: peracetic acid (PAA) and EarthTec QZ, a copper-based product. Pilot-scale experiments were conducted to test EarthTec QZ for veliger control and to evaluate the efficiency of PAA and EarthTec QZ for adult mussel control. EarthTec QZ doses of 30, 60, and 120 μg/L as copper ions demonstrated dose-dependent veliger control at 12 °C. PAA doses of 5, 10, and 25 mg/L were effective for adult mussel control at the low water temperatures tested (4 °C). Results from this study indicate that PAA and EarthTec QZ may be an alternative to prechlorination.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.787
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Water Supply Research and Technology—AQUASame topicAquatic Invertebrate Ecology and BehaviorFrench-language works237,207