The acute toxicity of bitumen-influenced groundwaters from the oil sands region to aquatic organisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The extraction of surface mined bitumen from oil sands deposits in northern Alberta, Canada produces large quantities of liquid tailings waste, termed oil sands process-affected water (OSPW), which are stored in large tailings ponds. OSPW-derived chemicals from several tailings ponds migrating past containment structures and through groundwater systems pose a concern for surface water contamination. The present study investigated the toxicity of groundwater from near-field sites adjacent to a tailings pond with OPSW influence and far-field sites with only natural oil sands bitumen influence. The acute toxicity of unfractionated groundwater and isolated organic fractions was assessed using a suite of aquatic organisms (Pimephales promelas, Oryzias latipes, Daphnia magna, Hyalella azteca, Lampsilis spp., Ceriodaphnia dubia, Hexagenia spp., and Vibrio fischeri). Assessment of unfractionated groundwater demonstrated toxicity towards all invertebrates in at least one far-field sample, with both near-field and far-field samples with bitumen influence toxic towards P. promelas, while no toxicity was observed for O. latipes. When assessing the unfractionated groundwater and isolated organic fractions from near-field and far-field groundwater sites, P. promelas and H. azteca were the most sensitive to organic components, while D. magna and L. cardium were most sensitive to the inorganic components. Groundwater containing appreciable amounts of dissolved organics exhibited similar toxicities to sensitive species regardless of an OSPW or natural bitumen source. The lack of a clear distinction in relative acute toxicities between near-field and far-field samples indicates that the water-soluble chemicals associated with bitumen are acutely toxic to several aquatic organisms. This result, combined with the similarities in chemical profiles between bitumen-influenced groundwater originating from OSPW and/or natural sources, suggests that the industrial bitumen extraction processes corresponding to the tailings pond in this study are not contributing unique toxic substances to groundwater, relative to natural bitumen compounds present in groundwater flow systems.
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) | 0.000 | 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".