MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403533330 · doi:10.1080/19440049.2024.2417394

Contaminants and residues have varied distributions in large volumes of wheat

2024· article· en· W4403533330 on OpenAlexafffund
Sheryl A. Tittlemier, Richard Blagden, Jason Chan, Dainna Drul, Don Gaba, Mei Huang, Anja Richter, Mike Roscoe, Maria Serda, Valentina Timofeiev, Michael Tran

Bibliographic record

VenueFood Additives & Contaminants Part A · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycotoxins in Agriculture and Food
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaGovernment of Canada
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryContaminationAgronomyChemistryBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Analysis of bulk wheat consignments for naturally-occurring contaminants and residues from plant protection products is common, and helps manage potential health risks to consumers. The heterogeneous distribution of some mycotoxins in wheat has been described, however the distribution of other contaminants and residues has not yet been reported. This study characterized distributions of deoxynivalenol, ochratoxin A, ergot alkaloids, cadmium, and glyphosate in nine large consignments of wheat by analysing composite samples representing sub-lots prepared from increments obtained during the entire loading process. The widest span of concentrations within a consignment occurred for ochratoxin A (<0.5-22.9 µg/kg) and ergot alkaloids (0.009-0.486 mg/kg), followed by deoxynivalenol (<0.05-0.76 mg/kg) and glyphosate (<0.3-5.01 mg/kg), and then cadmium (0.022-0.102 mg/kg). Experimental semivariograms were plotted to model the spatio-temporal correlation of analytes within consignments during loading. Analyses demonstrated that distributions of contaminants and residues within a particular consignment differed, and that distributions of a particular contaminant or residue differed among consignments. The results indicate that sampling during only a portion of a loading or unloading process can result in a composite sample that is not representative of the consignment and thus increase the risk of misclassifying a consignment as compliant.

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 score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.241
Teacher spread0.224 · 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

Citations5
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFood Additives & Contaminants Part ASame topicMycotoxins in Agriculture and FoodFrench-language works237,207