Extracellular complexation of Cd in the Hartig net and cytosolic Zn sequestration in the fungal mantle of <i>Picea abies – Hebeloma crustuliniforme</i> ectomycorrhizas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT Compartmentation of heavy metals on or within mycorrhizal fungi may serve as a protective function for the roots of forest trees growing in soils containing elevated concentrations of metals such as Cd and Zn. In this paper we present the first quantitative measurements by X‐ray microanalysis of heavy metals in high‐pressure frozen and cryosectioned ectomycorrhizal fungal hyphae. We used this technique to analyse the main sites of Cd and Zn in fungal cells of mantle and Hartig net hyphae and in cortical root cells of symbiotic Picea abies – Hebeloma crustuliniforme associations to gain new insights into the mechanisms of detoxification of these two metals in Norway spruce seedlings. The mycorrhizal seedlings were exposed in growth pouches to either 1 mM Cd or 2 mM Zn for 5 weeks. The microanalytical data revealed that two distinct Cd‐ and Zn‐binding mechanisms are involved in cellular compartmentation of Cd and Zn in the mycobiont. Whereas extracellular complexation of Cd occurred predominantly in the Hartig net hyphae, both extracellular complexation and cytosolic sequestration of Zn occurred in the fungal tissue. The vacuoles were presumed not to be a significant pool for Cd and Zn storage. Cadmium was almost exclusively localized in the cell walls of the Hartig net (up to 161 mmol kg−1 DW) compared with significantly lower concentrations in the cell walls of mantle hyphae (22 mmol kg−1 DW) and in the cell walls of cortical cells (15 mmol kg−1 DW). This suggests that the apoplast of the Hartig net is a primary accumulation site for Cd. Zinc accumulated mainly in the cell walls of the mantle hyphae (111 mmol kg−1 DW), the Hartig net hyphae (130 mmol kg−1 DW) and the cortical cells (152 mmol kg−1 DW). In addition, Zn occurred in high concentrations in the cytoplasm of the fungal mantle hyphae (up to 164 mmol kg−1 DW) suggesting that both the cell walls and the cytoplasm of fungal tissue are the main accumulation sites for Zn in P. abies resulting in decreased Zn transfer from the fungus to the root.
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".