MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4298326628 · doi:10.1002/ieam.4693

ESASeedPARAM: A seed treatment model for threatened and endangered bird species in the United States

2022· article· en· W4298326628 on OpenAlexaff
Dwayne R. J. Moore, Colleen D Priest

Bibliographic record

VenueIntegrated Environmental Assessment and Management · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicInsect and Pesticide Research
Canadian institutionsIntrinsik (Canada)
FundersBayer CropScienceBASF Corporation
KeywordsEndangered speciesThreatened speciesWildlifeIngestionToxicologyRisk assessmentSowingEnvironmental scienceBiologyEcologyAgronomyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The USEPA, National Marine Fisheries Service, and Fish and Wildlife Service are required to assess the risks of pesticides undergoing registration or reregistration to threatened and endangered (i.e., listed) species. Currently, the USEPA lacks a refined model to assess the risks of seed treatments to listed bird species. We developed the Endangered Species Assessment Seed Treatment Probabilistic Avian Risk Assessment Model (ESASeedPARAM) to incorporate species-specific diets, body weights, and food ingestion rates for potentially exposed listed bird species. The model also incorporates information on dissipation of seed residues after planting, and metabolism and elimination by birds during exposure. The ESASeedPARAM estimates hourly intake from ingestion of treated seeds for up to 50 days after planting. For each simulated bird, maximum retained dose (= body burden) and maximum rolling average total daily intake are estimated for acute and chronic exposure, respectively. The model is probabilistic and estimates exposure and risk for 20 birds on each of 1000 fields. The model accounts for interfield variation in the amount of waste grain on the soil surface in tilled, reduced till, and untilled fields. To estimate the fate of each bird from acute exposure, a random value is selected from the appropriate dose-response relationship and compared with the maximum retained dose. If acute exposure exceeds the randomly chosen effects value, mortality is assumed. For chronic risk, the most sensitive No Observed Adverse Effects Level (NOAEL) and Lowest Observed Adverse Effects Level (LOAEL) for an apical endpoint (survival, growth, reproduction) are compared with maximum rolling average total daily intake. In this article, we describe a case study conducted with the ESASeedPARAM for imidacloprid used as a seed treatment on wheat and soybean. Integr Environ Assess Manag 2023;19:527-546. © 2022 SETAC.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.361
Threshold uncertainty score0.310

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntegrated Environmental Assessment and ManagementSame topicInsect and Pesticide ResearchFrench-language works237,207