MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1554294359 · doi:10.5772/55124

Coping Mechanisms of Plants to Metal Contaminated Soil

2013· book-chapter· en· W1554294359 on OpenAlexfundno aff
M. Mehes-Smith, K. K. Nkongolo, Ewa Cholew

Bibliographic record

VenueInTech eBooks · 2013
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Micronutrient Interactions and Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCoping (psychology)Environmental scienceSoil contaminationContaminationEnvironmental chemistryPsychologySoil scienceBiologyEcologyChemistrySoil waterClinical psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Metals such as cobalt (Co), copper (Cu), iron (Fe) and nickel (Ni) are essential for nor‐ mal plant growth and development since they contribute to the function of many en‐ zymes and proteins. However, metals can potentially become toxic to plants when they are present at high levels in their bioavailable forms (Hall, 2002). Phytotoxic levels of one or more inorganic ions in soil can be found in various parts of the world. These toxic sites occurred through natural processes or by anthropogenic effects. Naturally toxic soils include saline, acidic and serpentine soils, while anthropogenic polluted soils occur through mining activities, aerial fallout, and the run-off from galvanized sources of electricity pylons or motorway verges polluted by vehicle exhaust fumes (Bradshaw, 1984). The biochemical effect of metals on plants varies and the excess metal usually results in oxidative damage which affects their phenotype (Kachout et al., 2009)

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations72
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInTech eBooksSame topicPlant Micronutrient Interactions and EffectsFrench-language works237,207