Biomonitoring of heavy metals and metalloids with wild mammals in the Iberian Peninsula: a systematic review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trace elements (including heavy metals) can negatively affect the environment and the health of living beings. Biomonitoring is a transdisciplinary tool to evaluate this pollution type and its respective consequences in ecosystems, food chains, and webs. This review used systematic methods to identify published literature on biomonitoring of heavy metal(loid)s using wild mammals on the Iberian Peninsula. A total of 30 different mammalian species (30/141) were included in 62 Iberian biomonitoring studies: 22 species from terrestrial habitats and 8 from aquatic habitats. Carnivores (including piscivores) were the most represented in both habitat types (7/22 in terrestrial; 8/8 in aquatic). Most studies used more than one tissue (2.8 ± 1.3), with a preference for the liver and kidney. Cd was the most determined metal, measured in 45% of the biomonitoring studies analysed, highlighting its potential health impact on mammals. Further research is crucial to provide more information on mammalian species' susceptibility to this One Health problem, and to cover more habitats, trophic chains, and (or) geographical areas.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".