Assessment of Douro and Ave River (Portugal) lower basin water quality focusing on physicochemical and trace element spatiotemporal changes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Water quality of Douro and Ave lower basin was evaluated regarding physicochemical parameters (pH, conductivity, dissolved oxygen and temperature), nutrient compounds (nitrates, nitrites, ammonium and orthophosphates), chlorophyll a and occurrence of trace elements (Li, Be, Al, Ti, V, Cr, Co, Ni, Cu, Zn, Se, Mo, Ag, Cd, Sb, Ba, Tl, Pb, Th and U). To study spatiotemporal variations and possible anthropogenic sources, estuarine samples were collected at nine sampling sites in Douro and five in Ave distributed along the estuaries at four sampling campaigns (spring, summer, fall and winter). According to the water quality standards for aquatic life and recreation, Douro and Ave river water quality was found out of safe limits regarding several parameters. Nitrate levels were systematically high (> 50 mg L−1 in a significant number of samples) and mean levels of trace elements were higher than the established values of Canadian Environmental Quality Guidelines for aquatic life protection for Al, Cu, Se, Ag, Cd and Pb in Douro and Ave, and also Zn in Ave. Significant spatial differences were found in Ave river estuary for trace elements with a clear trend for higher values from upstream to downstream found. Seasonal differences were also observed particularly in Douro river estuary with higher levels in spring for most elements. © 2018, © 2018 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".