MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4361285127 · doi:10.1007/s13280-023-01855-y

Global change effects on biogeochemical mercury cycling

2023· review· en· W4361285127 on OpenAlexaff
Jeroen E. Sonke, Hélène Angot, Yanxu Zhang, Alexandre J. Poulain, Erik Björn, Amina T. Schartup

Bibliographic record

VenueAMBIO · 2023
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesDartmouth CollegeGulf Research ProgramNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiogeochemical cycleMercury (programming language)Environmental scienceGlobal changeCyclingBiomeEnvironmental changeEcosystemPermafrostClimate changeEnvironmental chemistryEnvironmental protectionEcologyGeographyChemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Past and present anthropogenic mercury (Hg) release to ecosystems causes neurotoxicity and cardiovascular disease in humans with an estimated economic cost of $117 billion USD annually. Humans are primarily exposed to Hg via the consumption of contaminated freshwater and marine fish. The UNEP Minamata Convention on Hg aims to curb Hg release to the environment and is accompanied by global Hg monitoring efforts to track its success. The biogeochemical Hg cycle is a complex cascade of release, dispersal, transformation and bio-uptake processes that link Hg sources to Hg exposure. Global change interacts with the Hg cycle by impacting the physical, biogeochemical and ecological factors that control these processes. In this review we examine how global change such as biome shifts, deforestation, permafrost thaw or ocean stratification will alter Hg cycling and exposure. Based on past declines in Hg release and environmental levels, we expect that future policy impacts should be distinguishable from global change effects at the regional and global scales.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.097
GPT teacher head0.369
Teacher spread0.271 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations150
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAMBIOSame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207