Bibliographic record
Abstract
A comparison of acute toxicity (LC50 values) among nine toxicants: a) six metals: Cd, Cr, Cu, Hg, Pb, Ti, and b) three organics: benzene, ethyl acetate, and toluene, between the exotic cladoceran species Daphnia magna Straus 1820 and two native strains of freshwater cladoceran species: Daphnia pulex Leydig, 1860 and Simocephalus vetulus (O.F. Müller, 1776) was performed.We hypothesized that the exotic species would be less sensitive than native species.Our hypothesis was fulfilled.Daphnia magna was less sensitive than native species to eight of the nine compounds we analyzed.Results suggest that native species are better adjusted to local environmental conditions, and are more reliable as bioindicators of potential effects of toxicants on aquatic biota.Although the use of D. magna is recommended because of its ample toxicity database, some researchers propose the use of native species for toxicity tests.Therefore, to propose a native species to be considered as a test organism for official toxicity test for tropical countries, there is a need to increase the database of toxicants and to compare the sensitivities of several classes of toxicants with a model organism whose sensitivity to a broad variety of toxicants is well known, like D. magna.
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) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".