MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414554289 · doi:10.1186/s43591-025-00145-6

The Toxicity of Microplastics Explorer (ToMEx) 2.0

2025· article· en· W4414554289 on OpenAlexaff
Leah M. Thornton Hampton, Dana Briggs Wyler, Bethanie Carney Almroth, Scott Coffin, Win Cowger, Darragh Doyle, Eden K. Hataley, Sara J. Hutton, Magdalena M. Mair, Ezra Miller, Laura Monclús, Emma E. Sharpe, Siddiqui Samreen, Quinn P. V. Allamby, Ana L. Antonio Vital, Davide Asnicar, Jennifer L. Bare, Andrew Barrick, Katherine Berreman, Lidwina Bertrand, Virginia Boone, Agathe Bour, Julian Brehm, Víctor Carrasco-Navarro, Garth A. Covernton, Patricia Cubanski, Pedro Silva, Luan de Souza Leite, Samantha May Gene, Ludovic Hermabessière, Asta Hooge, Yuichi Iwasaki, Natasha Klasios, Christine M. Knauss, Azora König Kardgar, Philipp Kropf, Isaac Kudu, Anna Kukkola, Christian Laforsch, Stephanie B. Kennedy, Frédéric D.L. Leusch, Li Li, Hsuan-Cheng Lu, Uddin Md Saif, Simona Mondellini, John P. Norman, Zacharias Pandelides, Tove Petersson, Danielle A. Philibert, Elina Kvist, Anja F. R. M. Ramsperger, Gabrielle Rigutto, Sven Ritschar, Monica Hamann Sandgaard, M. Schott, Michael Schwarzer, Katryna J. Seabrook, Teresa M. Seifried, Rohan Sepahi, Mariella Siña, Alex N. Testoff, Maaike Vercauteren, Colleen M. Wardlaw, Rachel Zajac-Fay, Alvine C. Mehinto

Bibliographic record

VenueMicroplastics and Nanoplastics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaQueen's UniversityHuntsman Marine Science CentreUniversity of TorontoMcMaster University
FundersSouthern California Coastal Water Research ProjectAustrian Science FundConsejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y TécnicasFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São PauloDeutsche ForschungsgemeinschaftSuomen KulttuurirahastoItä-Suomen Yliopisto
KeywordsMicroplasticsToxicityRisk assessmentChemical toxicity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 2021 the Toxicity of Microplastics Explorer (ToMEx, https://microplastics.sccwrp.org) was released as an open source, open access database and web application for microplastics toxicity. Since then, it has been utilized by the microplastic research community for the exploration, visualization, and analysis of toxicity data for both hazard characterization and risk assessment. The peer-reviewed literature has continued to grow exponentially, making ToMEx out-of-date. To ensure the continued utility of ToMEx, an international crowd-sourcing approach was utilized to update ToMEx by extracting data from additional studies published since the original release. Through this process, both the aquatic and human health ToMEx databases roughly doubled in size, and modest increases in data diversity (e.g., number of species represented, types of test particles) were observed in the aquatic organisms database. However, most trends (e.g., greater toxicities observed with smaller particle sizes, lack of dose-response data etc.) observed in the first iteration of ToMEx remained constant. A previously developed framework for deriving ecological health-based microplastic thresholds using species sensitivity distributions was reapplied to determine how thresholds and their associated uncertainty intervals would change following the database update. Twelve new studies passed minimum screening criteria and were deemed fit for the purpose of threshold derivation. The addition of new data allowed for the separation of freshwater and marine compartments which had previously been combined due to a lack of applicable toxicity data for freshwater species. When molecular and cellular level endpoints were included, freshwater thresholds were comparable or increased from values calculated using previous data (-5 to 2.5-fold change) whereas marine thresholds dramatically decreased (-5000 to -29-fold change). However, when endpoints were restricted to organism and above, marine and freshwater thresholds were comparable to those calculated previously (-20 to 14-fold change). Confidence intervals for both marine and freshwater thresholds remained wide. The doubling of the database increases the value of ToMEx for researchers, particularly those focused on characterizing hazards associated with microplastics. Its utility remains limited for environmental managers as 89% of studies in ToMEx 2.0 failed to meet minimum screening criteria for threshold derivation, highlighting the need to generate fit-for-purpose toxicity data for threshold development. However, ToMEx continues to be a useful research tool, and future iterations could become even more powerful through novel artificial intelligence applications to streamline data curation and even predict toxicological outcomes. Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s43591-025-00145-6.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.549
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.196
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMicroplastics and NanoplasticsSame topicMicroplastics and Plastic PollutionFrench-language works237,207