Potentially Toxic Metals Enrichment in Soils of Ishiagu Mining Community, Southeastern Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This Study was carried out to evaluate potentially toxic metals enrichment, pollution and potential ecological risk in the soils of Ishiagu. The concentrations of Cadmium (Cd), Chromium (Cr), Cobalt (Co), Copper (Cu), Lead (Pb), Manganese (Mn), Nickel (Ni), Zinc (Zn), Aluminum (Al) and Iron (Fe) in soil samples from the area were analyzed by Bureau Veritas Laboratory, Vancouver, Canada, using inductively-coupled plasma optic emission spectrometry (ICP-OES). Descriptive statistics, enrichment factor, pollution load and potential ecological risk indices were employed to analyze the data in order to understand the characteristics of potentially toxic metals in the study area. The potentially toxic metals statistic show the mean values (mg/kg-1 ) of Pb, Zn, Mn, Fe, Al, Cd, Cr, Ni, Co, and Cu to be 205.7, 162, 527, 35892, 11374, 1.3, 21.6, 15, 14.6 and 11.1 respectively. The soil enrichment varied considerably between mining and non-mining areas with mining area being extremely enriched with Pb, Zn and Cd, and significantly enriched with Co, Cu, Ni and Fe. Non- mining areas are minimally enriched with all investigated metals. The soils around the mines are polluted with Pb and Cd, where both metals also pose very high ecological risks.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".