In vitro bioassays to estimate avian toxicity and contaminant levels in passive sampler extracts from wetlands surrounding tailings ponds in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oil extraction in the Athabasca Oil Sands Region generates large volumes of waste, called tailings, that are stored in tailings ponds.These tailings are toxic largely due to the presence of naphthenic acids (NAs) and concern is mounting about seepage into the surrounding tributaries.The objective of this thesis was to rank the relative toxicity of passive sampler extracts from 6 wetlands using in vitro screening, determine if bioactivity could predict NA concentrations, and elucidate species differences between chickens and double-crested cormorants (DCCO).Hepatic cells were cultured as 3D spheroids.Higher levels of NAs were found in wetlands close to oil sands activity compared to ones further away.The concentrations of NAs were reflected in the bioactivity results for chickens which were also determined to be more sensitive than DCCO.This thesis demonstrates the use of a non-animal screening method for environmental monitoring in an ecosystem of concern in Canada.Beck, E. M.,
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".