MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391782314 · doi:10.53555/sfs.v10i1s.2152

Phytoremediation: A Way Forward Towards Heavy Metal Management

2023· article· en· W4391782314 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abhishek Ghosal, Priya Saha, Joydeb Mallick, Sany Sarkar, Suranjana Sarkar, Bidisha Ghosh, Semanti Ghosh, Subhasis Sarkar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhytoremediationHeavy metalsEnvironmental scienceBusinessEnvironmental planningEnvironmental chemistryChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From year to year, the amount of heavy metals in the environment rises. Decontamination of heavy metal-contaminated soils is crucial for ecological restoration and environmental health maintenance. Using natural processes, phytoremediation helps to remove pollutants from the environment. There are many ways that plants help to remove pollutants from the environment, including uptake and concentration, transformation of pollutants, stability, and rhizosphere degradation, which involves encouraging the development of bacteria to break down contaminants in the root zone. Although the use of phytoremediation is growing, the ecological properties of the plants utilised have received very little study. This study looked into whether native plants may be used to clean up the soil while simultaneously offering benefits above ground, such habitat for wildlife. The relatively new technology of phytoremediation has definite advantages over conventional site cleanup techniques. Some of its uses have only been evaluated in a lab setting or greenhouse, whilst others have undergone sufficient field testing to permit full-scale operation. Scientists and engineers have recently created the eco-friendly and cost-effective phytoremediation method, which uses living plants or biomass/microorganisms to clean up polluted areas. Applications that it can be used for include phytofiltration, phytostabilization, phytoextraction, and phytodegradation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.126
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.136 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Survey in Fisheries SciencesSame topicMycorrhizal Fungi and Plant InteractionsFrench-language works237,207