MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389335656 · doi:10.3390/toxics11120987

Assessment of Biofilm Growth on Microplastics in Freshwaters Using a Passive Flow-Through System

2023· article· en· W4389335656 on OpenAlexafffund
Chengyang Jiang, Husein Almuhtaram, Michael J. McKie, Robert C. Andrews

Bibliographic record

VenueToxics · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersEnvironment CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsBiofilmMicroplasticsSalmonella entericaEnvironmental chemistrySurface waterMicrobiologyChemistryBiofoulingSalmonellaBiologyEnvironmental scienceBacteriaEnvironmental engineeringBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Biofilms that colonize on the surface of microplastics (MPs) in freshwaters may pose a potential health risk. This study examined factors that influence MP-associated biofilm growth, including polymer type, degree of weathering, and source water quality. Weathered MPs produced in-lab were employed in biofilm trials conducted on site using a passive flow-through system with raw water at drinking water treatment facility intakes. Adenosine triphosphate (ATP) was used to quantify biofilm abundance; biofilm composition was assessed via metagenomic sequencing. Biofilm growth was observed on all polymer types examined and most prevalent on polyvinyl chloride (PVC), where ATP levels were 6 to 12 times higher when compared to other polymers. Pathogen-containing species including Salmonella enterica and Escherichia coli were present on all polymers with relative abundance up to 13.7%. S. enterica was selectively enriched on weathered MPs in specific water matrices. These findings support the need to research the potential accumulation of pathogenic organisms on microplastic surfaces.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations25
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToxicsSame topicMicroplastics and Plastic PollutionFrench-language works237,207