MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224238708 · doi:10.3390/ijerph19084454

Ecological Risk Assessment of Trace Metal in Pacific Sector of Arctic Ocean and Bering Strait Surface Sediments

2022· article· en· W4224238708 on OpenAlexaff
Juan Wang, William A. Gough, Jing Yan, Zhibo Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy metals in environment
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersState Oceanic AdministrationPolar Research Institute of ChinaChinese Arctic and Antarctic Administration
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceArcticTrace elementSedimentContaminationTrace metalEnrichment factorThe arcticBaseline (sea)OceanographyEnvironmental chemistryEcologyPhysical geographyGeologyMetalGeographyBiologyChemistryGeomorphologyGeochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The arctic region is a remote area with relatively few anthropogenic inputs, but there is increasing concern over toxic trace metal contamination in the Arctic Ocean. In this study, distribution characteristics of eight trace metals in the surface sediment of the Pacific Sector of the Arctic Ocean and Bering Strait are analyzed. The geochemical baseline value of each metal element is explored using the relative cumulative frequency curve method; the enrichment factor (EF), geo-accumulation index (Igeo) and potential ecological risk index (RI) are applied to assess the ecological risk level of the trace metals. According to the results, Cu, As and Hg had a little more content variation, and their contents in some areas were significantly higher than the previous reports. EF values show an obvious enrichment of element As, followed by Cr element with the moderate enrichment; the enrichment of the other six elements are not related to human activity. The Igeo value shows a moderately contaminated to heavily contaminated level of As and a moderately contaminated level of Cr. According to the potential ecological risk indexes in each site, most sites are at a low ecological risk level except five sites with RI/baseline values exceeding 150 which are at a moderate ecological risk level.

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 score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.107

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.310 · 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

Citations13
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public HealthSame topicHeavy metals in environmentFrench-language works237,207