MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6939675579 · doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.3569430

Biological effects of tritium on fish cells in the concentration range of international drinking water standards

2016· article· en· W6939675579 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueFigshare · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Law and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMinnowTritiumCatfishGenotoxicityMicronucleus testEcotoxicologyMicronucleusFish <Actinopterygii>

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: To evaluate whether the current Canadian tritium drinking water limit is protective of aquatic biota, an in vitro study was designed to assess the biological effects of low concentrations of tritium, similar to what would typically be found near a Canadian nuclear power station, and higher concentrations spanning the range of international tritium drinking water standards. Materials and methods: Channel catfish peripheral blood B-lymphoblast and fathead minnow testis cells were exposed to 10–100,000 Bq l−1 of tritium, after which eight molecular and cellular endpoints were assessed. Results: Increased numbers of DNA strand breaks were observed and ATP levels were increased. There were no increases in γH2AX-mediated DNA repair. No differences in cell growth were noted. Exposure to the lowest concentrations of tritium were associated with a modest increase in the viability of fathead minnow testicular cells. Using the micronucleus assay, an adaptive response was observed in catfish B-lymphoblasts. Conclusions: Using molecular endpoints, biological responses to tritium in the range of Canadian and international drinking water standards were observed. At the cellular level, no detrimental effects were noted on growth or cycling, and protective effects were observed as an increase in cell viability and an induced resistance to a large challenge dose.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.060
Threshold uncertainty score0.118

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFigshareSame topicCriminal Law and PolicyFrench-language works237,207