Ageing affects microplastic toxicity over time: Effects of aged polycarbonate on germination, growth, and oxidative stress of Lepidium sativum
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plastic has been an environmental pollutant far longer than claimed by the first reports surfacing in 1979, meaning some plastic materials have been decaying in nature for decades. Nevertheless, the threat posed to biota is not fully understood, especially from aged microplastic. The question considered in this study was whether the adverse effects of new plastic differ from those of old plastic material. Therefore, the morphological and physiological effects on Lepidium sativum with exposure to both new and aged polycarbonate were considered against a known stressor leaching from polycarbonate with time, bisphenol-A. Exposure to new and short-term aged polycarbonate (up to 80 days) elicited the most severe effects such as germination inhibition, reduced seedling growth, decreased chlorophyll concentrations, and increased catalase activity. These adverse effects in L. sativum associated with polycarbonate exposure were reduced as a function of the ageing time applied to the polycarbonate. The chemical substances that lend new polycarbonate material its toxicity were likely leached with time during the ageing process. Based on the results obtained, temperature and humidity based artificial ageing significantly reduced the phytotoxicity of the microplastic particles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".