Bibliographic record
Abstract
Elevated toxaphene levels have been reported in the biota of the Arctic. The purpose of this study is to measure total toxaphene levels in food samples commonly consumed by the Canadian Inuit and study the relationship between concentrations of total toxaphene and individual congeners. A total of 127 Inuit food samples were collected for toxaphene analysis. Total toxaphene and the specific toxaphene congeners including Parlar #26, #40/41, #42, #44, #50 and #62 were detected in the food samples. Total toxaphene concentrations ranged from 13 to 2800 ng/g and various congener concentrations ranged from 0 to 610 ng/g. Concentrations of total toxaphene were strongly correlated with congener concentration in marine mammals and weaker in fish. The sum of congeners Parlar #26, #50 and #62 accounted for 0--15% of total toxaphene in fish and 0--66% in marine mammals. Regression models were used to estimate total toxaphene based on individual or combinations of congener concentrations. Dietary intake was estimated to be 1.07 and 0.78 mug/kg body weight per day in Chesterfield Inlet and Igloolik. Our results show that there is no general conversion factor that can be used to estimate total toxaphene concentrations based on congener measurements.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".