Unraveling the resuspension and transformation of stranded oil: Mechanisms driving oil-particle aggregate formation in intertidal zones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The intertidal zone, serving as a dynamic interface, presents a challenging environment for understanding the transport of spilled oil. This study explores the resuspension of stranded oil and the formation of suspended oil-particle aggregates (OPAs) under varying sediment properties, water chemistry, hydrodynamic forces, and biodegradation conditions. Findings reveal that sediment grain size and mineralogical structure influence oil resuspension and OPA formation but function through distinct mechanisms. Mixed sediments exhibit variable oil-mineral interaction regimes and sediment cohesiveness, which together govern oil resuspension and OPA formation. An increase in ionic strength can largely constrain the resuspension of stranded oil by promoting the swelling of the montmorillonite interlayer space and reducing the electrostatic repulsion among oil-contaminated particles, particularly at low ionic concentrations where oil resuspension is highly sensitive to changes in ionic strength. Both natural and commercial amphiphilic compounds facilitated oil resuspension; however, excessive concentrations of commercial amphiphilic compounds hindered oil resuspension. Stronger hydrodynamic disturbances promoted OPA fragmentation while simultaneously driving oil resuspension, potentially expanding contamination areas. Biodegradation altered oil composition, thereby improving its adhesion to sediments and reducing resuspension, but it may pose challenges for sediment cleanup due to its increased recalcitrance. These findings highlight the complexity of stranded oil behavior in intertidal zones and contribute to the development of targeted cleanup strategies for specific conditions of affected intertidal zones.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".