MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4324332921 · doi:10.1007/s00128-023-03701-z

Hormetic Effects of Cerium, Lanthanum and Their Combination at Sub-micromolar Concentrations in Sea Urchin Sperm

2023· article· en· W4324332921 on OpenAlexaff
Giovanni Pagano, Antonios Apostolos Brouziotis, Daniel Mark Lyons, Ivana Čarapar, Rahime Oral, Serkan Tez, Philippe J. Thomas, Franca Tommasi, Giovanni Libralato, Marco Guida, Marco Trifuoggi

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeochemistry and Elemental Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersUniversità degli Studi di Napoli Federico II
KeywordsSpermHuman fertilizationSea urchinLanthanumCeriumOffspringEcotoxicologyHormesisBiologyChemistryAndrologyAnimal scienceToxicologyEcologyBiochemistryAnatomyBotanyMedicineInorganic chemistryGeneticsPregnancy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rare earth elements (REEs) cerium (Ce) and lanthanum (La) and their combination were tested across a concentration range, from toxic (10 −4 to 10 −5 M) to lower concentrations (10 −6 to 10 −8 M) for their effects on sea urchin (Sphaerechinus granularis) sperm. A significantly decreased fertilization rate (FR) was found for sperm exposed to 10 −5 M Ce, La and their combination, opposed to a significant increase of FR following 10 −7 and 10 −8 M REE sperm exposure. The offspring of REE-exposed sperm showed significantly increased developmental defects following sperm exposure to 10 −5 M REEs vs. untreated controls, while exposure to 10 −7 and 10 −8 M REEs resulted in significantly decreased rates of developmental defects. Both of observed effects–on sperm fertilization success and on offspring quality–were closely exerted by Ce or La or their combination.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.097
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.165
Teacher spread0.162 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin of Environmental Contamination and ToxicologySame topicGeochemistry and Elemental AnalysisFrench-language works237,207