Cadmium uptake and translocation in seedlings of near isogenic lines of durum wheat that differ in grain cadmium accumulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cadmium (Cd) concentrations in durum wheat (Triticum turgidum L. var durum) grain grown in North American prairie soils often exceed proposed international trade standards. To understand the physiological processes responsible for elevated Cd accumulation in shoots and grain, Cd uptake and translocation were studied in seedlings of a pair of near-isogenic durum wheat lines, high and low for Cd accumulation in grain. RESULTS: In short-term studies (<3 h) using 109Cd-labelled nutrient solutions, there were no differences between lines in time- or concentration-dependent 109Cd accumulation by roots. In contrast, rates of 109Cd translocation from roots to shoots following longer exposure (48-60 h) were 1.8-fold higher in the high Cd-accumulating line, despite equal whole-plant 109Cd accumulation in the lines. Over the same period, the 109Cd concentration in root-pressure xylem exudates was 1.7 to 1.9-fold higher in the high Cd-accumulating line. There were no differences between the lines in 65Zn accumulation or partitioning that could account for the difference between lines in 109Cd translocation. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that restricted root-to-shoot Cd translocation may limit Cd accumulation in durum wheat grain by directly controlling Cd translocation from roots during grain filling, or by controlling the size of shoot Cd pools that can be remobilised to the grain.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".