Concentration Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons in Coastal Waters of Bushehr Port
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In order to study concentration of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in seawater from Bushehr coast and for comparison with available guidelines samples of seawater were collected from five different stations along the Bushehr coast in August and February 2011. PAHs were extracted by Hexane solvent and analyzed using HPLC system (Knauer). Results showed that tPAHs concentration in seawater were 31.0, 20.8, 4.0, 17.6 and 12.3 µg l-1, in August and 38.4, 23.0, 5.4, 19.3 and 17.2 µg l-1 in February respectively, at stations Rafael, Sheghab, Abshirinkon, Lian and Helyleh. The concentrations of tPAHs in the seawater were not significantly different during August and February (P>0.05). Significant difference was observed between tPAHs concentration between the stations (P<0.05). The tPAHs concentration was maximum in Rafael and its minimum was found in Abshirinkon. The tPAHs concentration in Bushehr area was relatively higher compared to other locations of the world. Even though concentrations of anthracene, phenanthrene, fluoranthene and pyrene were above the Canadian Environment Guidance, the carcinogenic compounds appeared in lower concentrations than the non-carcinogenic PAHs. Since Bushehr coastal waters is contaminated by PAHs, precise monitoring and control of oil discharge into the coastal waters as well as reduction of urban effluents input should be undertaken. Meanwhile the continuous monitoring of PAHs compounds in the area is recommended.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".