An evaluation of extractants for assessment of metal phytoavailability to guide reclamation practices in acidic soilscapes in northern regions
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abedin, J., Beckett, P. and Spiers, G. 2012. An evaluation of extractants for assessment of metal phytoavailability to guide reclamation practices in acidic soilscapes in northern regions. Can. J. Soil Sci. 92: 253-268. Although soil organic matter and nutrient bioavailability in metal-impacted soilscapes of Sudbury, Ontario, are potentially limiting full ecological recovery, total metal content was used as the critical driver for a 2008 ecological risk assessment. The current greenhouse study evaluated chemical extractants to predict bioavailability of nutrients and contaminant metals to indigenous grasses (Deschampsia). Single extraction methods (0.01 M strontium nitrate, water, 0.01 M calcium chloride, 0.1 M sodium nitrate, 1.0 M ammonium nitrate, 0.1 M lithium nitrate, 1.0 M magnesium chloride, 0.11 M acetic acid, 1.0 M ammonium acetate, 0.05 M ammonium-EDTA, pore water) were examined to assess availability of potentially phytotoxic metals and nutrients in smelter-impacted soils. Extraction procedures to predict phytoavailability were either soil concentration or plant tissue concentration and element dependent. Total and extractable metal concentrations were more correlated for regional contaminant metals (e.g., copper, lead, arsenic, selenium) released by the smelting industry than non-contaminant ones (e.g., iron, calcium, potassium, boron, zinc, molybdenum). The lack of relationship between total and extractable concentrations for most non-contaminant metals suggests total concentration is not a good indicator of phytoavailability for nutrient elements. Stronger correlations between shoot tissue and extractable concentrations were observed for less aggressive extractants (pore water, water, lithium nitrate) reflecting their suitability in predicting phytoavailability over most aggressive ones (except ammonium nitrate).
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it