Effects of phosphorus and zinc fertilizer on cadmium uptake and distribution in flax and durum wheat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cadmium accumulation in crops presents a potential risk to human health. To understand the difference between dicotyledonous and monocotyledonous species in respect of Cd accumulation, and to develop fertilizer management practices to minimise Cd uptake, a growth chamber study was conducted to evaluate the interactive effects of Cd concentration in phosphate and Zn fertilizer on Cd uptake in flax ( Linum usitatissimum L) and durum wheat ( Triticum turgidum L). Cadmium concentration was higher in flax than durum wheat shoots. Cadmium concentration was lower and Zn concentration higher in the flax seed and durum wheat grain than in the root, shoot or straw of both species. These results suggest that flax has comparatively ineffective barriers discriminating against the transport of Cd from the root to the shoot via the xylem, and that both crops may restrict Cd translocation to the seed/grain via the phloem. Commercial grade monoammonium phosphate (NH 4 H 2 PO 4 ) or triple superphosphate (Ca(H 2 PO 4 ) 2 ) produced higher seed Cd concentrations than did reagent grade P in flax but not in durum wheat. Application of P significantly decreased seed/grain Zn concentration and increased seed/grain Cd concentration. Zinc addition at 20 mg Zn kg −1 soil with P decreased seed/grain Cd concentration (average 42.2% for flax, 65.4% for durum wheat), Cd accumulation (average 37.2% for flax, 62.4% for durum wheat) and Cd translocation to the seed/grain (average 20.0% for flax, 34.5% for durum wheat) in both crops. These results indicate that there is an antagonistic effect of Zn on Cd for root uptake and distribution within the plant. Copyright © 2004 Society of Chemical Industry
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) | 0.001 | 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".