MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235506860 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14661843.v1

Evaluation of the diffusion gradient in thin-films (DGT) technique for measuring trace metal concentrations in freshwaters

2021· preprint· en· W4235506860 on OpenAlexaffabout
Deborah Lynn Parent

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiffusive gradients in thin filmsEnvironmental chemistryMetalDissolved organic carbonDiffusionChemistryLabilityMetal ions in aqueous solution

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The recently developed Diffusion Gradient in Thin-films (DGT) technique is based on a simple device that accumulates metals in situ, over time in a Na resin gel. Metal ions diffuse through a hydrogel membrane and are rapidly bound by the resin. The many advantages associated with the DGT technique (simplicity, in situ technique, low detection limits, and ability to measure many metals) have lead to its rapid application in aquatic environments. Caveats have been recognized with the DGT technique when it is used in aquatic environments. These include: the ability of strongly complexed organic-metal molecules to diffuse through the hydrogel and become complexed by the resin gel, and in freshwater lakes with a low concentration of cations (Σ [cations] ≤ 2 × 10 -4 M), it is hypothesized that the diffusion coefficient of metal ions entering the DGT device increases. Both of these caveats overestimate the concentrations of labile inorganic metals in the deployment solution. The hypothesis that deploying DGT devices equipped with two different hydrogel formulations ("open" and "tight") will provide reasonable measurements of DGT-labile "organic" and "inorganic" concentrations of Mn, Cd and Pb was tested in the field. DGT devices were deployed in three lakes (Lake Tantare, Lake 8t. Joseph and Lake Memphremagog). To compare the responses of the DGT devices with the total dissolved metal concentration (< 0.20 um) of each lake, in situ dialysis samplers were deployed simultaneously. Overestimation of DGT-labile "inorganic" concentrations of Mn and Pb, and overestimation of DGT-labile "organic" Cd was observed when compared to the measured total dissolved metal concentrations in the lakes. The hypothesis that DGT devices equipped with a Ca form of the resin gel (as an alternative to the sodium based resin gel in the DGT device) will reasonably measure Mn, Cd and Pb labile metal concentrations in freshwater lakes with low cation concentrations was tested. DGT devices with the Ca form of the resin gel were deployed in Lake Tantare, Lake 8t. Joseph and Lake Memphremagog. Overestimation of DGT-labile metal concentrations of Mn, Cd and Pb were observed with the Ca resin gel in the lakes when compared to the measured total dissolved concentrations. The implication of these findings is that the DGT technique should not be used in freshwaters with low cation concentrations (Σ [cations] ≤ 2 × 10 -4 M), typical of lakes found in the Canadian environment, until the caveats of the technique have been resolved. Extreme caution should be used when drawing conclusions regarding the concentrations of inorganic and organic metal species, since it has been found the DGT devices with the two different hydrogel formulations overestimate the inorganic metal concentration relative to the organic metal concentration in aquatic 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207