Microplastics in American lobster (Homarus americanus) and Mussel Species in Coastal Southwestern New Brunswick, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dataset consists of data collected by the Passamaquoddy Recognition Group Inc. (PRGI), which is an Indigenous not-for-profit organization led by the Peskotomuhkati Nation at Skutik. This project is funded by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO), Coastal Environmental Baseline Program (CEBP). Data will include samples collected from 2020-2027 and represents field sampling data as well as laboratory and Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) data associated with the sampling of American lobster (Homarus americanus) and Northern Horse mussel (Modiolus modiolus) for the purpose of studying the presence and abundance of microplastics and micro-debris in this species. Sampling: Samples were collected from the Port of Saint John region, Passamaquoddy Bay and around Grand Manan Island in New Brunswick. Samples were collected using standard lobster traps with PRGI technical staff present for all sampling activity. Retained lobsters were transported back to laboratory spaces in coolers and immediately euthanized via freezing. Laboratory Analysis: Once lobsters are euthanized and dissected, digestion of organic tissue, and filtration begin. Digestive tracts and muscle tissues are dissected from the lobster, and whole mussels are placed in a 10% KOH solution. Samples are then transferred into a warming oven at 50 degrees Celsius for at least 24 hours. This process allows for the digestion of most organic material. Large undigested remains are passed through a sieve and analyzed visually by technicians under a dissection microscope. Any potential microplastics identified at this stage are isolated on a filter paper and stored on a petri slide. The remaining tissue is filtered using a 0.8 µm pore size filter and a vacuum pump. As with larger debris, these filters are also analyzed visually under a dissection microscope. Any potential microplastics are marked and numbered for FTIR identification. Dissection, digestion, and visual analysis are conducted in a lab space, making use of biosafety cabinets, and fume hoods to aid in the reduction of microplastic contamination of samples, whenever possible. All implements used are triple rinsed with filtered (0.8 µm or Milli-Q) water, and samples are covered when not being handled to reduce potential contamination. Environmental blanks, H20 blanks, and KOH blanks are taken throughout the process for quality control. As of 2022, PRGI conducts laboratory analysis in a dedicated in-house clean lab, minimizing exposure to contaminants by following cleaning procedures and low plastics laboratory dress code. Once visual analysis is completed, petri slides with marked and numbered potential plastics are sent to Western Surface Science laboratory at the University of Western Ontario for FTIR analysis. This analysis indicates the chemical composition of identified particles and indicates if such particles are made of plastic or of other materials.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".