Overview Of Approaches to Improve Rhizoremediation of Petroleum Hydrocarbon-Contaminated Soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil contamination with petroleum hydrocarbons (PHCs) has become a global concern in the word due to intensification of industrial activities. This creates a serious environmental issue, therefore there is a need to find solutions, including application of efficient remediation technologies, or to improve current techniques. Rhizoremediation is a sub-category of the phytoremediation which refers to Phytomanagement that uses plants and their associated microbiota. These green technologies have received a global attention as a cost-effective and possible efficient remediation technique that can be applied to cleanup PHCs-polluted soils. The mechanism of rhizoremediation process is that plant roots stimulate soil microbes to mineralize organic contaminants to H2O and CO2. However, this multipartite interaction is much complex because many biotic and abiotic factors can influence microbial processes in the soil, making the efficiency of rhizoremediation unpredictable. This review reports the progress made on rhizoremediation approaches that can overcome the limitations and improve the efficiency of PHCs-contaminated soils. The addressed approaches in this review include: 1) selecting plants with desired characteristics suitable for rhizoremediation, 2) the exploitation and manipulation of plant microbiome by using inoculant containing plant growth-promoting rhizobacteria (PGPR) or hydrocarbon-degrading microbes, or a combination of both types of organisms, and 3) enhancement of the understanding of how host-plant assembles a beneficial microbiome, and how it functions, under pollutant stress.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".