MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4382644261 · doi:10.47262/sl/11.2.132023500

Assessing the Native Plant Species for Phytoremediation of Freshwater Bodies in Southern Ontario, Canada

2023· article· en· W4382644261 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScience Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNutrientEnvironmental scienceWetlandPhytoremediationAquatic plantCeratophyllum demersumEcosystemSurface runoffMarshBiologyEcologyMacrophyteSoil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many Canadian freshwater ecosystems are polluted by agricultural runoff, impairing their function with increased nutrient levels. Here, we simulated the water filtration function of wetlands, which uses aquatic plant species to create a phytoremediation system that can address the contamination of freshwater ecosystems with excess nutrients. We collected the water samples from three of Ontario’s freshwater bodies: the Holland Marsh, a highly agricultural area; the Nottawasaga River, a river in a rural area and part of a greater Nottawasaga watershed and Lake Ontario, near industrial sites in the Niagara region. To filter nitrogen (N), phosphorus (P) and potassium (K) from the collected samples, we determined the effectiveness of five local wetland and agricultural plant species: duckweed (Lemnoideae), watercress (Nasturtium officinale), coontail (Ceratophyllum demersum), thyme (Thymus praecox) and parsley (Petroselinum crispum). During a five-month experiment, plants were grown in collected water samples to determine their ability to uptake N, P and K. Along with monitoring their effectiveness in lowering nutrient levels, we tracked the health and growth of each plant species. The results showed that duckweed was the most tolerant to high nutrient concentrations and the most effective at overall nutrient reduction. From the Holland Marsh sample with the highest nutrient concentrations among all collected samples, the duckweed reduced N, P, and K by 11%, 53%, and 21%, respectively, compared to the control sample (i.e., with no plant). This filtration system allows for ecosystem restoration and prevention of further damage and contamination from agricultural runoff and nutrient pollution.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.029
Threshold uncertainty score0.212

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScience LettersSame topicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater TreatmentFrench-language works237,207