MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4406860038 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.4c10360

Contribution of Coal Tar Sources to Polycyclic Aromatic Compounds and Associated Ecological Risk in Lake Ontario Sediments: Inference from a Novel Marker

2025· article· en· W4406860038 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Xue Zhang, Dan Bowman, Miriam L. Diamond, Paul A. Helm, Karl J. Jobst, Chunyan Hao, Sonya Kleywegt, Zi-Feng Zhang, Chris Marvin, Xianming Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaMemorial University of NewfoundlandMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and ParksUniversity of TorontoBrock UniversityConcordia University
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsCoal tartar (computing)Environmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryInferenceOil sandsCoalEcologySedimentChemistryGeologyArchaeologyGeographyBiologyAsphaltGeomorphologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coal tar-related products as a source of polycyclic aromatic compounds (PACs) are particularly concerning due to high PAC concentrations and inadequate source management. Benzo[b]carbazole, a benzocarbazole isomer exclusively found in coal tar-derived products, acts as an ideal marker to distinguish coal tar sources from others, enabling more robust quantification of coal tar contributions to PACs. To evaluate the historical and recent contributions of coal tar-related sources to the levels of PACs in Lake Ontario and associated ecological risk, we analyzed 31 PACs and 3 BCBz isomers in surface sediments and a sediment core. In the surface sediments, summed concentrations of the PACs ranged from 170 to 11,000 ng/g, dry weight, 63-90% of which were attributed to the 16 EPA polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Our results suggest the contribution by coal tar-related sources to PAC contamination has increased over the past decades and reached over 40% in Lake Ontario surface sediments. Employing the toxicological-priority-index scheme for the field data, high molecular weight EPA PAHs were identified as priority PACs. Cumulative PAC risk assessments indicate that with the exception of Mimico Creek, all other sampling sites exhibited elevated risk values.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.501
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations6
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & Technology→Same topicToxic Organic Pollutants Impact→French-language works237,207→