Accumulation of cadmium by durum wheat roots: Bases for citrate-mediated exceptions to the free ion model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The accumulation of Cd in durum wheat (Triticum turgidum) roots from hydroponic solutions, with the proportion of total Cd (8.9-445 nM Cd) as Cd2+ varied by the addition of citrate, was determined to test the free-ion model (FIM) of metal bioavailability for higher plants. Calcium, Mg, and K were also varied. Citrate enhanced root-Cd accumulation at higher Cd2+ concentrations but not lower relative to the same Cd2+ concentrations in solutions containing 0 mM citrate. Elevating Ca2+ and Mg2+ concentrations in the citrate solution to the same as those in control solutions alleviated some of the citrate-mediated enhancement but not all. Solutions containing 66% less Ca or Mg than control but the same Cd2+ concentration and no citrate also resulted in increased root Cd. Elevated K+ did not influence Cd accumulation. Regression relationships between root-Cd accumulation and total Cd in solution were similar for the control and pooled amended solutions, whereas they were different for root-Cd accumulation and solution Cd2+. These results contribute to the growing body of evidence that the FIM alone is likely insufficient to predict plant accumulation of metals from soils, although it may be a useful probe for the mechanistic bases of metal bioavailability.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".