MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408587451 · doi:10.1039/d4em00612g

Per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) contamination of surface waters by historic landfills <i>via</i> groundwater plumes: ecosystem exposure and downstream mass loading

2025· article· en· W4408587451 on OpenAlexafffund
James W. Roy, Victoria R. Propp, Susan J. Brown, Cassandra Brinovcar, James E. Smith, Amila O. De Silva

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science Processes & Impacts · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaMinistry of EnvironmentGovernment of Ontario
KeywordsContaminationEnvironmental scienceGroundwaterDownstream (manufacturing)EcosystemEnvironmental chemistrySurface waterEnvironmental engineeringHydrology (agriculture)GeologyChemistryGeotechnical engineeringEcologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

(DC)), with evidence of year-round pelagic zone exposure. PFAS concentrations in the epibenthic zones could vary between that of the endobenthic and pelagic zones, sometimes with daily, event-based, and longer-term patterns. Together these findings suggest historic landfill plumes can lead to substantial PFAS exposure to a variety of aquatic life. Downstream PFAS mass loadings during base flows were relatively small individually (15 (HB) and 36 (DC) g per year (∑PFAS)); however, collective loadings from the numerous historic landfills in a watershed could contribute to increasing PFAS concentrations of connected water bodies, with implications for ecological health, drinking water sources, and fisheries.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations10
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science Processes & ImpactsSame topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207