ARCTIC Toxicity of Prudhoe Bay Crude Oil to Alaskan Arctic Zooplankton
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT. Bioassay experiments were conducted to determine the relative susceptibilities of three arctic zooplankton species to oil pollution, and the results were compared with the effects of an actual oil spill on a pond near Barrow. In both the bioassays and the pond, the addition of Prudhoe Bay crude oil was toxic to fairy shrimp (Branchionecta paladosa O. F. Müller), which seemed most sensitive, Daphnia middendofiana Fischer, which was next most susceptible and Heterocope septentrionalis Juday and Muttkowski, which appeared somewhat resistant to the effects of oil. Cyclopoid copepods were the only common zooplankters able to survive the pond oil spill, and these were still present two and one half weeks after the spill. The rapid deaths of the other species, especially the branchiopods, suggest that zooplankton may be the most susceptible of all arctic freshwater organisms to oil pollution. RkSUMk. On a réalisé des expériences analytiques biologiques pour déterminer les susceptibilité $ relatives de trois espèces de zooplancton arctique, à la pollution pétrolière et on a comparé les résultats avec les effets d’un écoulement actuel de pétrole sur un étang près de Barrow. Dans les deux cas, l’addition du brut de Prudhoe Bay était toxique à la petite crevette (Branchionecta paladosa), qui semblait la plus sensible devant Daphnia Middendofiana et Heterocope septentrionalis qui apparaissaient ’ quelque peu résistantes aux effets du pétrole. Seuls, les copepodes cyclopoides, dans le zooplancton ordinaire, survivaient à l’écoulement de pétrole dans I’étang, deux semaines et demi après I’écoulement. La mort rapide des autres expèces, en particulier les branchiopodes, suggère que le zooplancton peut être le plus susceptible de tous les organismes arctiques d’eau douce, à la pollution du pétrole. Traduit par Alain de Vendigies, Aquitaine Co. of Canada Ltd.
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 | 0.000 | 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".