MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058541420 · doi:10.11648/j.ijema.20140203.14

Different Heavy Metal Concentrations in Plants and Soil Irrigated with Industrial / Sewage Waste Water

2014· article· en· W2058541420 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Khadija Siddique

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Monitoring and Analysis · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy metals in environment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAlberta Agricultural Research Institute
KeywordsEnvironmental chemistryIrrigationManganeseSewageEnvironmental scienceHeavy metalsSoil waterAtomic absorption spectroscopyChemistrySoil testEnvironmental engineeringAgronomySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Application of waste water for irrigation purposes has increased over the past years. This waste water contains high amount of trace elements and heavy metals. Objectives of this study were to evaluate the concentration of iron (Fe), lead (Pb) and manganese (Mn) in soil irrigated with waste water at different depths and also in the leaves and flowers of vegetables grown in that soil. Samples were collected from vegetable farms located along drain where vegetables were grown by untreated sewage water. Plant samples were washed and cut into pieces, air dried in fluidized bed dryer. After digestion, concentration of heavy metals was detected by atomic absorption spectrophotometer (AAS). The results revealed that heavy metals concentration in soil irrigated with waste water was higher the toxicity level at depth of 0-15cm than the lower layer 16-30cm while the leaves and fruits of vegetables also showed higher concentration of heavy metals. The maximum concentration of lead, iron and manganese was recorded in soil samples taken from Nawabanwala, Malkanwala and Sheikhanwala respectively.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.085
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations14
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Monitoring and AnalysisSame topicHeavy metals in environmentFrench-language works237,207