Aluminum accumulation in the roots of <i>Melastoma malabathricum</i>, an aluminum-accumulating plant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Generally, plants that have Al levels of at least 1000 mg·kg–1 in their leaves are defined as Al accumulators. These plants are often found in very acid soils in the tropics. The mechanisms of Al uptake in strong Al accumulators are still unclear. In this study, we investigated the characteristics of Al uptake and accumulation in the roots of Melastoma malabathricum L., an Al-accumulating plant that grows in acidic soils in the tropics. Melastoma malabathricum roots hardly absorb any La, possibly because of lower affinity of the root apoplast to La than to Al. Exposure to La did not affect the concentration of citrate in the roots; however, application of Al increased the citrate level considerably, corresponding with the amount of Al accumulation in the symplast. 27Al NMR analysis revealed that Al complexes with oxalate, but not with citrate, in the roots of M. malabathricum. This investigation revealed that oxalate, which occurs constitutively at high concentrations, is a ligand for Al accumulation in both root and shoot tissue, and that citrate, the synthesis of which is induced by Al application, is a ligand mainly used for Al translocation from the roots to the shoots.
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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".