MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3003260086 · doi:10.1021/acssuschemeng.9b06721

Alteration of Crop Yield and Quality of Three Vegetables upon Exposure to Silver Nanoparticles in Sludge-Amended Soil

2020· article· en· W3003260086 on OpenAlexaff
Min Li, Hailong Liu, Fei Dang, Holger Hintelmann, Bin Yin, Dongmei Zhou

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanoparticles: synthesis and applications
Canadian institutionsTrent University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsRaphanusLactucaCropAgronomyChemistryContaminationHorticultureYield (engineering)BiologyMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impacts of land application of sludge contaminated with silver nanoparticles (Ag NPs) on crop yield and nutritional quality are relatively unknown. Chili (Capsicum annuum L.), lettuce (Lactuca sativa), and radish (Raphanus sativus L.) were grown for 52–71 days in soil amended by sludge with or without Ag NPs. Then root-exposed chili and lettuce continued to grow until day 75 and 105, during which they were simultaneously exposed to 107Ag NPs via leaves for 3 days. Root exposure reduced the yield of lettuce and radish by 42 and 61%. It had minimal effects on essential element (Ca, K, Mg, P, Fe, Mn, and Zn) contents in chili fruits and radish roots or on protein, amino acid, and most essential element contents in lettuce leaves. Exceptions were K and Mg in lettuce leaves, which decreased by ∼25%. Further, root uptake dominated over foliar uptake (86 and 95% of total Ag) in Ag accumulation in younger leaves and flowers of lettuce, as revealed by the stable isotope tracer technique, suggesting unintended residual transgenerational effects of land application of sludge contaminated with Ag NPs. These results guide the agricultural application of Ag NPs in a more efficient and safer manner.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.479

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations42
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS Sustainable Chemistry & EngineeringSame topicNanoparticles: synthesis and applicationsFrench-language works237,207