Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The bioaccumulation behavior, including the uptake, internal distribution, depuration, and biotransformation rates, of three widely used linear methyl-siloxanes was investigated in rainbow trout. Dietary uptake efficiencies of octamethyltrisiloxane (L3), decamethyltetrasiloxane (L4), and dodecamethylpentasiloxane (L5) were 15% (3.3% standard error [SE]), 8.6% (1.4% SE), and 15% (1.8% SE), respectively, and for L3 and L4 were well below those of nonmetabolizable reference chemicals with similar octanol–water partition coefficients, suggesting significant intestinal biotransformation of L3 and L4. Somatic biotransformation rate constants were 0.024 (0.003 SE) day–1 for L3 and 0.0045 (0.0053 SE) day–1 for L4 and could not be determined for L5. Lipid-normalized biomagnification factors for L3, L4, and L5 were 0.24 (0.02 SE), 0.24 (0.01 SE), and 0.62 (0.05 SE) kg-lipid kg-lipid–1, respectively. Bioconcentration factors standardized to a 5% lipid content fish for water in Canadian oligotrophic lakes with a dissolved organic carbon content of 7.1 mg L–1 were 2787 (354 SE) for L3, 2689 (312 SE) for L4, and 1705 (418 SE) L kg-wet weight–1, respectively, and 3085 (392 SE) for L3, 4227 (490 SE) for L4, and 3831 (938 SE) L kg-wet weight–1 in water with a dissolved organic carbon content of 2.0 mg L–1. A comparison of 238 bioaccumulation profiles for 166 different chemicals shows that the bioaccumulation profiles for L3, L4, and L5 are vastly different from those of other very hydrophobic compounds found in the environment. Environ Toxicol Chem 2024;43:42–51. © 2023 The Authors. Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of 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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".