MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7161996087 · doi:10.82308/35648

Evaluation of methodology for mercury exposure assessment with field and laboratory studies

2005· dissertation· en· W7161996087 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Melissa Legrand

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMercury (programming language)MethylmercuryExposure assessmentInductively coupled plasma mass spectrometryAtomic absorption spectroscopyHair analysisRelative standard deviationMass spectrometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The threat of environmental mercury (Hg), particularly methylmercury (MeHg), exposure to the health of humans has been well documented. Thus, it is important to monitor exposure and body burden for public health protection. The first objective of this thesis was to characterize the risk of Hg exposure in two Canadian coastal communities: Grand Marian (n = 91) and St. Andrews/St. Stephen (n = 52), New Brunswick, Canada, using dietary questionnaires and hair analysis. Average Hg intakes and body burden were below the most conservative guidelines. We attributed these results to the low Hg concentrations found in the species commonly consumed: haddock, canned tuna, lobster and pollock (all below 0.2 mg/kg). The analytical method employed to determine Hg in hair, cold vapor atomic absorption (CV-AAS), required a bundle of 100-150 hair strands and involved lengthy chemical digestion procedures which reduce throughput. Direct solid introduction techniques minimize these weaknesses. Our second and third objectives were to evaluate two such methods: (1) combustion, gold amalgamation, atomic absorption spectrometry (C-GA-AAS) and (2) laser ablation inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (LA-ICP-MS) for measuring total Hg in single hair strands. Hair samples with a wide range of Hg exposure were obtained from communities. A 1:1 relationship was observed between C-GA-AAS and the established CV-AAS for analysis of 1-cm hair segments. Additionally, the average relative standard deviation (RSD) of Hg between hair strands within an individual was 6.5 +/- 2.8%, thus justifying the use of a single hair strand for biomonitoring. With a limit of quantification of 0.10 ng of total Hg, a single hair strand with average weight of 0.5 mg and Hg concentrations of 0.2 mg/kg can be measured routinely. Using LA-ICP-MS, we showed that a single laser shot can sample hair material within 50 mum along a single hair strand which is equivalent to less than one day of

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)0.058
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.051
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0580.051
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0050.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.004

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMercury impact and mitigation studies→French-language works237,207→