Metal Exposure, Bioaccumulation, and Toxicity Assessment in Sediments from the St. Lawrence River Before and After Remediation Using a Resuspension Technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
, evaluated the effects of exposure to heavy metal-contaminated sediments collected from the study area under three conditions: before remediation, after remediation, and suspended particulate matter (SPM). The selected toxicity tests allowed for the evaluation of biological responses across varying concentrations of heavy metals. Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences in survival or growth between sediment-exposed organisms and controls for either species. In addition, bioaccumulation of Cr, Ni, Cu, Zn, As, Cd, and Pb in both organisms was assessed and compared among the sediment conditions and the control. No statistically significant differences in tissue metal concentrations were found between organisms exposed to sediments from the study area and those in control conditions. Sequential extraction analysis indicated that a substantial proportion of metals in the sediments were bound in stable, non-bioavailable forms. These findings are consistent with the observed biological responses, as low levels of bioavailable metals corresponded with the absence of toxic effects. Together, the data confirm that the sediments, regardless of remediation stage or particle fraction, posed no significant biological risk under the conditions tested.
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 | 0.001 | 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".