Mineral nutrition of mycorrhized seedlings of a tropical gum tree in copper contaminated soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extensive use of such fungicides leads to Cu diffusion in most soils and increases risk of Cu phytotoxicity for the tropical gum tree (Sterculia setigera) grown in these soils. A pot experiment was set to examine the effect of Arbuscular Mycorrhizal Fungus (AMF), Rhizophagus fasciculatus, and soil copper levels content on mineral status of the tropical gum tree Sterculia setigera. Plants were grown in soil with different Cu levels (0, 200, 400, 600 and 800 mg.kg-1 ). Control plants (C) were found to have survival rate were of 40% at 600 mg.kg-1 Cu. Inoculated plants (T) on their part had a survival rate of 100% on Cu contaminated soils up to 600 mg.kg-1 Cu. However, at 800 mg.kg-1 Cu level, 100% of the plants died. Root colonization rates (7.4%) were significantly lower at 600 mg.kg-1 Cu. In contaminated soil, higher mycorrhizal colonization was measured at 0, 200, and 400 mg.kg-1Cu addition levels. AMF-inoculated plants had higher K, P, N, Ca, Mg and Cu concentrations than uninoculated plants. In mycorrhized plants, nutrient concentrations increased with the increasing levels of soil Cu and were higher than those of the non-mycorrhized plants. Unlike Na, the uptake of K increased in shoot tissues of mycorrhizal plants with the increasing levels of Cu. Results suggested that S. setigera associated with AM fungus Rhizophagus fasciculatus had the potential to survive and to grow under moderately Cu contaminated soil system.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".