A cross-regional ecological assessment of contaminants in soils intended for agri-food initiatives on Indigenous Peoples’ lands in Australia and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Globally, soil contamination threatens ecosystems and food security. This study examines the contamination of soils intended for agri-food initiatives by Indigenous communities across New South Wales and Queensland, Australia, and Newfoundland and subarctic Ontario, Canada. Soils from 47 sites were tested for metals, metalloids, organochlorine (OC) pesticides, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) to assess ecological risks and compare against national guidelines. Australian soils were primarily contaminated with lead (Pb) and to a lesser extent with other metals and metalloids, whereas subarctic Ontario soils were heavily contaminated with OC pesticides, and to a lesser extent metals and metalloids. Newfoundland soils contained arsenic (As) concentrations exceeding agricultural soil guidelines with limited OC levels. The contaminants from these sites stem from both anthropogenic activities and natural geological sources; however, their precise origins-whether from the historical use of banned substances or mineral extraction-are not fully elucidated for all sites. This article specifically highlights the need to assess soil to be used in agri-food initiatives for contaminants in rural and remote landscapes in Indigenous homelands worldwide and, in general, for all soil to be used in any agri-food initiative.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".