Pesticide, trace metal and microbiological analyses of open field and greenhouse–harvested crops from Trinidad before and after processing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Greenhouse–grown crops are generally considered safer than open field crops. The study objectives were to determine whether greenhouse–grown crops in Trinidad were safer than open field crops by monitoring microbiological, trace metal and pesticide levels via a “farm-to-fork” approach. Open field tomatoes were compared to those grown in greenhouses over a two-year period. Additionally, greenhouse–grown tomatoes and sweet peppers from the university experimental station were analysed for food safety. Quantitative analyses were based on the presence of 45 pesticide residues, trace metals (lead and cadmium) and microbiological contaminants (faecal coliforms, Staphylococcus aureus and Salmonella sp.). Meals prepared from open field tomatoes in year 2 were analysed for food safety. Neither greenhouse–grown crops (tomatoes and sweet peppers) nor open field tomatoes had a hazardous quantity of the microbes screened or trace metals, except for a batch of open field tomatoes that contained 0.12 mg/kg lead. Eight pesticides (profenofos, ethion, lambda cyhalothrin, cypermethrin, bifenthrin, iprodione, permethrin, and endosulfan) detected in both the open field and greenhouse–grown crops over a two-year period were present below the EU and Codex MRLs, except for a batch of the university experimental station greenhouse–grown tomatoes and sweet peppers, which exceeded the Codex MRL for lambda cyhalothrin. More pesticides were found in year two due to possible additive effects. Meals prepared using tomatoes posed no health risk to children. Overall, the quality of the open field and greenhouse crops was acceptable for consumers, but annual monitoring of these parameters can assure food safety.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".