MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416122414 · doi:10.3389/fnut.2025.1656046

Investigation of the impact of brewing parameters on toxic element and rare earth element contamination in oolong tea

2025· article· en· W4416122414 on OpenAlexaff
Sixuan Wu, Ziming Peng, Yijun Ou, Florence Mhungu, Yanyan Wang, Yuhua Zhang, Lan Liu, Lili Huang, Rongfei Peng, Zhijun Bai, Weiwei Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Nutrition · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicHeavy Metals in Plants
Canadian institutionsHorizon Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBrewingContaminationRare earthConsumption (sociology)Rare-earth elementHazardous waste

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: With the growing consumption of oolong tea, concerns regarding the leaching of toxic elements and rare earth elements (REEs) during brewing necessitate investigation. Methods: We analyzed 108 oolong teas of diverse origins and varieties. The concentrations of six toxic elements (including Pb, Cd, Al) and fifteen REEs were measured by ICP-MS. The effects of water temperature (90°C, 100°C) and brewing time (5 seconds to 2 hours) on leaching rates were systematically examined. Results: <0.05) the leaching of most elements. Tieguanyin tea contained the highest levels of Pb, Al, and REEs. Samples from Fujian province significantly exceeded safety standards for Pb and Al. Anomalously, the leaching rate of Cd was lower at 100°C than at 90°C, while the release of scandium (Sc) increased with temperature. Discussion: This study reveals that brewing conditions are critical for elemental migration. To minimize the intake of harmful substances, consumers are advised to shorten the brewing time. We also call for strengthened regulatory standards for toxic elements and REEs in tea. These findings provide a scientific basis for guiding safe tea consumption practices.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in NutritionSame topicHeavy Metals in PlantsFrench-language works237,207