Modeling Bioavailability Limitations of Atrazine Degradation in Soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pesticide persistence in soils is a widespread environmental concern in agro-ecosystems. One particularly persistent pesticide is atrazine, which continues to be found in soils and groundwater in the EU despite having been banned since 2004. A range of physical and biological barriers, such as sorption and mass-transfer into bacterial cells, might limit atrazine degradation in soils. These effects have been observed in experiments and models working with simplified systems. We build on that work by developing a biogeochemical model of the degradation process. We extended existing engineered system models by including refined representations of mass-transfer processes across the cell membrane as well as thermodynamic growth constraints. We estimated model parameters by calibration with data on atrazine degradation, metabolite (hydroxyatrazine) formation, biomass, and isotope fractionation from a set of controlled retentostat/chemostat experiments. We then produced site-specific model predictions for arable topsoil and compared them with field observations of residual atrazine concentrations. We found that the model overestimated long-term atrazine biodegradation in soils, indicating that this process is likely not limited by bioavailability or energetic constraints of microbial growth. However, sorption-limited bioavailability, could explain the long-term fate and persistence of the main degradation metabolite hydroxyatrazine. Future studies should seek alternative controls that drive the observed atrazine persistence in soil. This work helps to bridge the gap between engineered and natural systems, allowing us to use laboratory setups to gain insight into real environmental systems.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".