Eid et al.: Evaluating the uptake of ten heavy metals by kidney bean (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) grown in a soil-sludge mixture using a

Overview

This source page is a mechanical bulk-ingest record for a PDF in the research-pulls corpus. It preserves source-level identity, routeable product/analyte scope, and exact extracted numeric lines for later human or fresh-context audit. It does not derive HMTc thresholds, percentiles, or brand-by-brand comparisons.

Key numbers

The worker extracted the full PDF text with layout preservation twice and compared extraction hashes before commit. The following lines are copied from numeric/table-bearing regions of the PDF and retain the source units and wording where legible:

• (ME = 1.00) but the lowest mean normalized bias (MNB = 0.01) was that of cobalt. For leaves, the equation with
• means indicated as landfills and land application (Li et al., 2018). Some studies have
• ME = 1 – (∑ (CModel − CMeasured)2 / ∑(CMeasured − CMean)2) (Eq.7)
• because it contains less than 1% OM. The pH of this soil is 8.7 (basic), which reduces
• agricultural soil ranged between a minimum of 1.1 mg kg−1 for Mo and a maximum of
• than in the other tissues, except Co, Mo and Ni (Table 2). In contrast, the HMs were
• Table 1. Chemical characteristics of the soil (n = 36) amended with sewage sludge after
• Table 2. Heavy metal concentrations in pods, leaves, stems and roots of Phaseolus vulgaris
• F-values represent one-way ANOVA, degrees of freedom = 3. Means in the same column followed by different letters are
• Table 3. Descriptive statistical results (mean ± standard error) of the bioconcentration
• Heavy metal BCF (n = 36) TFstem (n = 36) TFleaf (n = 36) TFpod (n = 12)
• F-values represent one-way ANOVA, degrees of freedom = 9. Means in the same column followed by different letters are
• same HM in the soil was significant and positive (Table 4). In addition, significant
• Figure 1. Linear relationships (r-values, n = 36) between bioconcentration factors (BCFs) of
• Figure 2. Linear relationships (r-values, n = 36) between bioconcentration factors (BCFs) of
• Table 4. Pearson correlation coefficient (r-value) between heavy metals in Phaseolus
• OM: organic matter content. n = 12: p < 0.05 (r ≥ 0.58), p < 0.01 (r ≥ 0.72), p < 0.001 (r ≥ 0.86). n = 36: p < 0.05 (r ≥ 0.33),
• Table 5. Regression models between heavy metal concentrations in Phaseolus vulgaris
• tissues (mg kg−1) and soil heavy metals (mg kg−1), pH and organic matter (OM) content (%)
• R2: coefficient of determination, ME: model efficiency, MNAE: mean normalized average error, MNB: mean normalized bias
• contents, were in the normal range reported by Allen (1989) and Kabata-Pendias
• critical ranges proposed by Kabata-Pendias (2011); however, some of them were within
• the normal range reported by Allen (1989) (e.g., concentrations of Cu, Fe, Mn, Pb and
• was > 1 for Mn, Mo, Pb and Zn, which means that P. vulgaris is a hyper-accumulator
• tissue:root ratio), all the values were < 1, except that for Mo, which means that the root
• variability (R2) in Cd in the tissues of cucumber was 49-76% (Eid et al., 2018a), in
• garden pea was 25-67% (Eid et al., 2020c), in Eruca sativa was 49-81% (Eid et al.,
• 2020b), in spinach was 83-88% (Eid et al., 2018b), compared with 44-61% for the P.
• vulgaris tissues. In their study on the Cd models of some vegetables, Bešter et al. (2013)
• reported R2 values of 41% for tomato and 90% for endive. Regarding the same element,
• Boshoff et al. (2014) reported an R2 range of 10-47% for Urtica dioica and 31-38% for
• 45% for lettuce and 47% for carrot. A possible reason for the lower R2 values of some
• Table 6. Regression models for predicting the concentration of Cd in plants based on the
• 18 Cdpod = −3.576 − 0.054 × Cdsoil + 0.460 × pH + 0.099 × OM (%) 54%
• 18 Cdleaf = 0.930 + 0.004 × Cdsoil – 0.093 × pH − 0.002 × OM (%) 44%
• 18 Cdstem = 1.770 − 0.037 × Cdsoil – 0.174 × pH + 0.019 × OM (%) 51%
• 18 Cdroot = 11.361 − 0.138 × Cdsoil − 1.263 × pH − 0.073 × OM (%) 61%
• Agrostis and 37 log Cdplant = −0.56 + (0.58 × log Cdsoil) 38%
• Poa species 37 log Cdplant = 0.08 + (0.27 × log CaCl2 (Cd)soil) 31%
• Barley 90 log Cdgrain = 0.04 + 0.21 × log Cdsoil – 0.23 × pH 22% Adams et al. (2004)
• Cabbage 16 Cdplant = 0.007 + 0.002 × Cdsoil 44% Bešter et al. (2013)
• Carrot 54 Cdplant = 0.107 + 0.017 × Cdsoil – 0.00007 × Mnsoil 47% Bešter et al. (2013)

Methods (brief)

• experiment was collected from nearby cultivated fields at a depth of 0-20 cm (Lat.: 18°
• (Eid et al., 2017). Soil and SS samples were air dried for 2 weeks, ground and passed
• post-harvest soil samples were air-dried for two weeks, ground and passed through a 2-
• mm sieve. Dried powders (pre- and post-harvest soil and SS samples) were analysed for
• For HM estimation, 0.5-1.0 g of each dried powders and plant sample was digested
• following the mixed-acid digestion method (HNO3 and HClO4; 3:1, v/v). A microwave
• sample preparation system was used for digestion (PerkinElmer Titan MPS,
• PerkinElmer Inc., USA). Blank samples were used to verify the accuracy of the
• digestion procedure and the subsequent analyses. Ten HMs (Cd, Co, Cr, Cu, Fe, Mn,
• methods applied to the P. vulgaris samples. Digestion and measurement of the ten HMs
• management practices and analytical methods used in digestion of sample materials (Du
• n: number of samples, R : coefficient of determination

Implications

This page makes the source discoverable for category-level evidence routing. Values remain source-native and should be used only with the stated matrix, species, basis, geography, and censoring context from the paper. The page does not convert total mercury to methylmercury or use total arsenic as inorganic arsenic.

Wiki pages this source may touch

• Root-Vegetable Purees
• Cadmium
• Nickel

Verification notes

• Identity check: DOI, raw handle, candidate cite-key, and SHA-256 were compared against existing wiki/sources/ pages before creation.
• Full-PDF read: pdftotext -layout was run on the full PDF twice; extracted text hashes matched before the page was written.
• Numeric verification: numeric/table-bearing lines were selected mechanically from the verified extraction and preserved without unit conversion or rounding.
• Brand firewall: the worker skips PDFs when extracted numeric lines appear brand/manufacturer-sensitive; this page contains category-level or species-level evidence only.
• HMTc firewall: no threshold, percentile, pass/fail, clean/dirty, or certification math is stated.

Update history

The five most recent substantive edits to this page, classified major (evidence or structure moved), correction (a published value or statement was wrong and has been fixed), or minor (narrative rewritten without changing the underlying evidence). Each description is derived from what the edit did to this page; the linked commit is the authoritative record, routine regeneration passes are excluded, and the full version history lives in git. When DOI minting comes online (see schema docs), each entry below will also link to a version-pinned DataCite DOI.