MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206779258 · doi:10.3390/w14010070

Proximity to Riparian Wetlands Increases Mercury Burden in Fish in the Upper St. Lawrence River

2022· article· en· W4206779258 on OpenAlexaff
Autumn Osgood, Evie S. Brahmstedt, Matthew J.S. Windle, Thomas M. Holsen, Michael R. Twiss

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Lawrence River Institute of Environmental Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWetlandMercury (programming language)Environmental scienceRiparian zonePerchFisheryMethylmercuryNeogobiusHabitatRound gobyEcologyPredationBioaccumulationBiologyFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mercury deposited in the Upper St. Lawrence River watershed by atmospheric deposition accumulated in riparian wetlands and is at risk of remobilization due to water level fluctuations. To examine if riparian wetlands are a source of mercury to fish, 174 yellow perch (Perca flavescens) and 145 round gobies (Neogobius melanostomus) were collected in 2019 from eight wetland and seven non-wetland habitats throughout the Upper St. Lawrence River. Mercury levels were significantly (p < 0.01) higher in fish collected from wetlands than those collected from non-wetland habitats for both yellow perch and round goby. Perch had mercury concentrations of 74.5 ± 35.4 ng/g dry wt in wetlands compared to 59.9 ± 23.0 ng/g dry wt in non-wetlands. Goby had mercury concentrations of 55.4 ± 13.8 ng/g dry wt in wetlands and non-wetland concentrations of 41.0 ± 14.0 ng/g dry wt. Riparian wetlands are areas of elevated mercury methylation and mobilization in the Upper St. Lawrence River and consequences to predators should be considered from the perspective of both wildlife preservation as well as fish consumption advisories for public health concerns.

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 score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207