The Toxicological Impact of Wastewaters on Drinking Waters Sources
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Surface waters may contain wastewater effluent associated with de facto reuse which can impact their toxicological properties both before and after treatment. This study examined the genotoxic response of three surface waters containing a range of wastewater effluent (5%, 10%, and 25% by volume). The SOS ChromotestTM was used to assay the genotoxicity of both chlorinated and unchlorinated mixtures whereas toxicity index model based on the CHO comet assay was used to predict the contribution of trihalomethanes (THM), haloacetonitriles (HAN), and halonitromethanes (HNM) to overall genotoxicity of chlorinated mixtures. Wastewaters were generally genotoxic whereas raw and chlorinated surface waters were not. Mixtures containing 5% and 10% wastewater generally had similar responses to chlorinated surface waters alone; significant effects were more common at higher ratios (≥ 25%). SOS genotoxicity correlated strongly with predicted genotoxicity, DOC, and THM concentrations, suggesting that THMs may potentially serve as surrogates for toxic disinfection by-products (DBPs).
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 | 0.001 | 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".