Effects and Risk Assessment of the Polycyclic Musk Compounds Galaxolide® and Tonalide® on Marine Microalgae, Invertebrates, and Fish
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The current research investigated the potential environmental risk of the polycyclic musk compounds, Galaxolide® (HHCB) and Tonalide® (AHTN), in the marine environments. These substances are lipophilic, bioaccumulated, and potentially biomagnified in aquatic organisms. To understand the toxicity of HHCB and AHTN, acute toxicity tests were performed by exposing marine microalgae (Phaeodactylum tricornutum, Tretraselmis chuii, and Isochrysis galbana), crustaceans (Artemia franciscana), echinoderms (Paracentrotus lividus), bivalves (Mytilus galloprovincialis), fish (Sparus aurata), and a candidate freshwater microalga (Raphidocelis subcapitata) to environmentally relevant concentrations (0.005–5 µg/L) following standardized protocols (US EPA, Environment Canada and OECD). P. tricornutum and I. galbana were sensitive to both substances and for P. tricornutum exposed to HHCB and AHTN, the IC10 values (the inhibition concentration at which 10% microalgae growth inhibition was observed) were 0.127 and 0.002 µg/L, respectively, while IC10 values calculated for I. galbana were 5.22 µg/L (a little higher than the highest concentration) and 0.328 µg/L, for HHCB and AHTN, respectively. Significant (p < 0.01) concentration dependent responses were measured in P. lividus and M. galloprovincialis larvae developments, as well as S. aurata mortality tested with HHCB. The effect of HHCB on P. lividus larvae development was the most sensitive endpoint recorded, producing an EC50 value (the effect concentration at which 50% effect was observed) of 4.063 µg/L. Considering the risk quotients both substances seem to represent high environmental risk to P. tricornutum and M. galloprovincialis in marine environments.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".