MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2997833680 · doi:10.15835/nbha47411613

Feasibility Study on Reducing Lead and Cadmium Absorption by Alfalfa (Medicago scutellata L.) in a Contaminated Soil Using Nano-Activated Carbon and Natural Based Nano-Zeolite

2019· article· en· W2997833680 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNotulae Botanicae Horti Agrobotanici Cluj-Napoca · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicNatural Products and Applications
Canadian institutionsScience North
FundersIslamic Azad University
KeywordsZeoliteCadmiumAdsorptionActivated carbonPhytoremediationBiomass (ecology)Environmental pollutionEnvironmental remediationEnvironmental scienceChemistryEnvironmental chemistryHeavy metalsContaminationEnvironmental protectionAgronomyBiologyEcologyCatalysisOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The first risk posed by heavy metal pollution in an ecosystem is metal accumulation in the biomass of growing plants, which has harmful effects on human health. Natural-based nanoparticles are efficient in remediating environmental pollutants because they have a high surface/volume ratio, high chemical activity and produce no harmful side-products. The present study investigates the capacity of natural-based nano-porous adsorbents for reducing the availability of heavy metals to annual alfalfa (Medicago scutellata L.) roots and keeps them in soil. In a factorial experiment based on a randomized design (with four replications), three nano-adsorbents (nano-activated carbon, natural nano-zeolite and modified nano-zeolite) and two heavy metals (lead and cadmium) have been tested. The results demonstrated that applying the highest rate of activated carbon and modified nano-zeolite reduced shoot Pb content by 34% and 33.2%, and shoot Cd content by 35.5% and 46.7%, respectively, compared with the adsorbent-free control.
 
 *********
 In press - Online First. Article has been peer reviewed, accepted for publication and published online without pagination. It will receive pagination when the issue will be ready for publishing as a complete number (Volume 47, Issue 4, 2019). The article is searchable and citable by Digital Object Identifier (DOI). DOI link will become active after the article will be included in the complete issue.
 *********

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.882
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.235 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it