MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385289618 · doi:10.18280/ijdne.180307

Hydrobiological Assessment of Water Quality in the Yesil River, Astana Region: An Environmental Evaluation

2023· article· en· W4385289618 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lyailya Akbayeva, Raikhan Beisenova, Rumiya Tazitdinova, Nazira Kobetaeva, Nurgul Mamytova

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and Ecodynamics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransboundary Water Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceWater qualityQuality (philosophy)Hydrology (agriculture)Water resource managementGeographyFisheryEnvironmental engineeringEcologyBiologyEngineeringGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study provides an in-depth characterization of the water quality in the Yesil River in the Astana region for 2019, utilizing hydrochemical parameters and key indicators of bacterioplankton, zooplankton, and zoobenthos.Quantitative evaluation methods were employed to assess hydrobionts, including total bacterial counts, heterotrophic bacterial counts, bacterial multiplication rates, biomass, and abundance of zooplankton and zoobenthos, in addition to species identification for various organisms.The results indicated that, based on the bacterioplankton development level, the investigated section of the Yesil River is classified as a mesotrophic water body.As the river flows through the city, the average bacterial mass doubling time decreases due to an increase in the proportion of heterotrophic bacteria.Based on the saprobity index level for the zooplankton community, the water in the Yesil River is categorized as moderately polluted.Macrozoobenthos saprobity indices range from moderately polluted to polluted waters.The final assessment of the water quality classification and contamination degree, according to Z.G.Gold's unified classifier, revealed a shift from class 3 in the sections upstream of Astana to class 4 in sections downstream of the city.

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)0.005
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 score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Design & Nature and EcodynamicsSame topicTransboundary Water Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207