Examining a synchrotron-based approach for<i>in situ</i>analyses of Al speciation in plant roots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aluminium (Al) K- and L-edge X-ray absorption near-edge structure (XANES) has been used to examine Al speciation in minerals but it remains unclear whether it is suitable for in situ analyses of Al speciation within plants. The XANES analyses for nine standard compounds and root tissues from soybean (Glycine max), buckwheat (Fagopyrum tataricum), and Arabidopsis (Arabidopsis thaliana) were conducted in situ. It was found that K-edge XANES is suitable for differentiating between tetrahedral coordination (peak of 1566 eV) and octahedral coordination (peak of 1568 to 1571 eV) Al, but not suitable for separating Al binding to some of the common physiologically relevant compounds in plant tissues. The Al L-edge XANES, which is more sensitive to changes in the chemical environment, was then examined. However, the poorer detection limit for analyses prevented differentiation of the Al forms in the plant tissues because of their comparatively low Al concentration. Where forms of Al differ markedly, K-edge analyses are likely to be of value for the examination of Al speciation in plant tissues. However, the apparent inability of Al K-edge XANES to differentiate between some of the physiologically relevant forms of Al may potentially limit its application within plant tissues, as does the poorer sensitivity at the L-edge.
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 | 0.001 | 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".