Secondary ingestion of microplastics from zooplankton by larval fish a major route of exposure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The release of plastics into aquatic ecosystems and their effects within food webs is a growing concern. Plastic ingestion in animals such as bivalves, fish, birds, and mammals are established areas of study, but the effects of plastics on smaller animals, such as zooplankton and larval fish, are not as readily observed. Additionally, primary ingestion of plastic directly from the water is only one route of accumulation of plastic. We examined secondary ingestion of microplastics from zooplankton to larval fish in a model laboratory system. Rotifer (Branchionus plicatilis) readily accumulated 6 µm plastic microspheres in a concentration and time dependent manner. Larval zebrafish (Danio rerio) also ingested free plastic from the water, but the greatest uptake of plastic was seen to be ingested through secondary ingestion of plastic-fed rotifer. These experiments present a model experimental system in which to study secondary ingestion and movement of microplastics between feed and prey.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".