The Investigation of Silicon Localization and Accumulation in Citrus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several studies have demonstrated Si absorption in monocotyledon and dicotyledon species. Regarding Si accumulation, studies in monocotyledons have identified Si deposition around the cell wall, cuticle layer bulliform cells, silica cells and endodermal cells. In previous studies with different citrus species there were evidence of Si accumulation, however no information on Si deposition can be found. Therefore, in this study, Si was applied (0 and 1000 mg L−1) to the roots of two citrus species, ‘Delta’ Valencia (Citrus sinensis) and ‘Nules’ Clementine (Citrus reticulata). Si accumulation were investigated in new, and old leaves and roots. Si deposition was investigated through scanning electron microscopy using energy dispersive analysis X-ray, environmental scanning electron microscopy and light microscopy. Si accumulation was significantly higher in Si treated leaves comparatively to the control in both young and mature leaves. Meanwhile, Si accumulation increased with leaf age. Additionally, Si accumulation was significantly higher in roots than in leaves. With respect to Si deposition, granules were identified in the epidermal cells through SEM and ESEM studies. The light microscopy identified the presence of Si granules in the surface and around the outer cell surface forming the cuticle-silica double layer of the lower epidermis in Si treated plants. Silica deposit were not found on the abaxial leaf surface. The findings suggest a passive uptake in citrus species.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".