MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390168885 · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2023.123185

High microplastic and anthropogenic particle contamination in the gastrointestinal tracts of tiger sharks (Galeocerdo cuvier) caught in the western North Atlantic Ocean

2023· article· en· W4390168885 on OpenAlexaff
Keenan Munno, Lisa A. Hoopes, Kady Lyons, Marcus Drymon, Bryan S. Frazier, Chelsea M. Rochman

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Pollution · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Marine Fisheries ServiceNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
KeywordsMicroplasticsTrophic levelAurelia auritaJellyfishApex predatorFisheryContaminationEnvironmental scienceSentinel speciesOceanographyEcologyBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

) before quantifying and categorizing suspected anthropogenic particles (>45 μm) by size, morphology, and colour. Anthropogenic particles were found in the stomachs and spiral valve of all sharks. A total of 3151 anthropogenic particles were observed across all stomachs with 1603 anthropogenic particles observed in a single specimen. A subset of suspected anthropogenic particles (14%) were chemically identified using Raman spectroscopy and μ-Fourier Transform Infrared spectroscopy to confirm anthropogenic origin. Overall, ≥95% of particles analyzed via spectroscopy were confirmed anthropogenic, with 45% confirmed as microplastics. Of the microplastics, polypropylene (32%) was the most common polymer. Diverse microparticle morphologies were found, with fragments (57%) and fibers (41%) most frequently observed. The high occurrence and abundance of anthropogenic particle contamination in tiger sharks is likely due to their generalist feeding strategy and high trophic position compared to other marine species. The literature review resulted in 32 studies published through 2022. Several methodologies were employed, and varying amounts of contamination were reported, but none reported contamination as high as detected in our study. Anthropogenic particle ingestion studies should continue in the tiger shark, in addition to other elasmobranch species, to further understand the effects of anthropogenic activities and associated pollution on these predators.

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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental PollutionSame topicMicroplastics and Plastic PollutionFrench-language works237,207