Influence of phosphorus application on growth and cadmium uptake of spinach in two cadmium‐contaminated soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A pot experiment was conducted to investigate the influence of phosphate (P) application on diethylene triamine pentaacetic acid (DTPA)–extractable cadmium (Cd) in soil and on growth and uptake of Cd by spinach (Spinacia oleracea L.). Two soils varying in texture were contaminated by application of five levels of Cd (NO3)2 (0, 20, 30, 40, and 60 mg Cd kg–1). Three levels of KH2PO4 (0, 12, and 24 mg P kg–1) were applied to determine immobilization of Cd by P. Spinach was grown for 60 d after seeding. Progressive contamination of soils through application of Cd affected dry‐matter yield (DMY) of spinach shoot differently in the two soils, with 67% reduction of DMY in the sandy soil and 34% in the silty‐loam soil. The application of P increased DMY of spinach from 4.53 to 6.06 g pot–1 (34%) in silty‐loam soil and from 3.54 to 5.12 g pot–1 (45%) in sandy soil. The contamination of soils increased Cd concentration in spinach shoots by 34 times in the sandy soil and 18 times in the silty‐loam soil. The application of P decreased Cd concentration in shoot. The decrease of Cd concentration was higher in the sandy soil in comparison to the silty‐loam soil. Phosphorus application enhanced DMY of spinach by decreasing Cd concentration in soil as well as in plants. The results indicate that Cd toxicity in soil can be alleviated by P application.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".