MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388987602 · doi:10.47363/jprsr/2023(4)145

Assessment of Pesticide Residues in Vegetables Commonly Consumed in The Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC): Inadequate Agricultural Practices and Potential Impacts for Public Health

2023· article· en· W4388987602 on OpenAlexaff
Joël Tuakuila, P M Ndelo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Pharmaceutical Research & Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPesticide Residue Analysis and Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPesticide residuePesticideEndosulfanToxicologyAgricultureAmaranthFood contaminantEnvironmental scienceFood safetyEnvironmental protectionChemistryFood scienceGeographyAgronomyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pesticides residues in food pose a serious risk to children and adults consuming pesticide-contaminated food. The aim of present study was to assess pesticide residues in vegetables in the Kinshasa and Lubumbashi cities of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). The levels of three pesticide residues were determined by gas chromatography coupled with electron capture detector (ECD) or mass spectrometer-time of flight detector (GC–ECD or GC-MS-TOF) in 96 samples of four vegetables amaranth, spinach, sorrel and sweet potato-leaves purchased from wholesale markets. The Dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane with its metabolites (3-DDTs), endosulfan and malathion residues were found in 100% of the vegetable samples from Lubumbashi and in 62.5% to 87.5% of all vegetable samples from Kinshasa. Risks were mainly associated with the residues of DDTs pesticides in vegetables. The HQ and HI estimations revealed a serious potential risk to consumers, children particularly. Due to multiple pesticide residues exceeding the MRLs for single residue levels, the consumers are exposed to pesticides, heavily in Lubumbashi. Due to increasing trend in pesticide use, continuous monitoring of pesticide residues in vegetables and other food is recommended in order to develop the base line data on which pesticide regulations could be enhanced in DRC.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.236
GPT teacher head0.478
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 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 venueJournal of Pharmaceutical Research & ReportsSame topicPesticide Residue Analysis and SafetyFrench-language works237,207