MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7106844929 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.17572269

Exploring the Relationship between Effect-based Analysis, Emerging Pollutants, and Conventional Water Quality Parameters in a Threatened Coastal Aquifer

2025· other· en· W7106844929 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsAquiferWater qualityContaminationGroundwaterWater pollutionPollutionGroundwater pollutionHydrology (agriculture)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The presence of emerging contaminants (ECs) in groundwater reserves is a growing concern globally. Despite this reality, limited data exists describing EC-associated biological activity in aquifers and the associations between EC burdens and conventional water quality parameters including chemistry and microbiology. The Cape Flats Aquifer (CFA) is subject to various sources of contamination (industrial, residential, and agricultural). To better understand the spatiotemporal patterns within this area, an extensive water quality index (WQI) was developed, incorporating 24 parameters measured over 98 boreholes within a five-year period (2018 – 2021, and 2023). Upon the identification of several contamination hotspots, a battery of effect-based methods (EBMs) were applied to screen groundwater for endocrine disruptive (i.e., estrogenicity- and androgenicity), and aryl hydrocarbon receptor activation over two seasons. An in vivo fish embryo toxicity (FET) assay was furthermore applied to screen for embryotoxicity and teratogenicity. Analytical chemistry was performed in parallel with the EBMs to quantify a selection of ECs including pharmaceuticals, pesticides, and personal care products. A subsequent pollution source delineation principal component analysis (PCA) using the WQI parameters showed that a mix of agricultural, geogenic, and residential sources contribute to the poor water quality. Further information could be deduced with the incorporation of the EBMs data, where certain sites had significant endocrine disruptive potential. We conclude that caution should be taken when abstracting water from areas that were identified as pollution hotspots and that efforts should be taken in curtailing some of the activities contributing to the deteriorating groundwater quality. Finally, we show that EBMs can be a valuable tool in combination with traditional water parameters to provide a more comprehensive analysis of at-risk groundwater sources.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.126
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.189 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicPharmaceutical and Antibiotic Environmental Impacts→French-language works237,207→