Plant-On-a-Disc (POD): A Phytofluidic platform enabling In Situ Root Analysis

Kaushal Agarwal; Pranab Kumar Mondal; Sumit Kumar Mehta

The Plant-on-a-Disc device grows eight Brassica seedlings in parallel radial channels and shows that hydrodynamic flow accelerates root elongation while triggering ROS generation and carotenoid signals.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · grok-4.3

2026-07-02 01:35 UTC pith:KX44T6W3

load-bearing objection The paper introduces a radial microchannel PDMS device for parallel seedling growth under modeled flow with multimodal imaging, but biological claims and flow uniformity rest on unvalidated modeling. the 1 major comments →

arxiv 2607.00942 v1 pith:KX44T6W3 submitted 2026-07-01 physics.bio-ph physics.flu-dyn

Plant-On-a-Disc (POD): A Phytofluidic platform enabling In Situ Root Analysis

Kaushal Agarwal , Sumit Kumar Mehta , Pranab Kumar Mondal This is my paper

classification physics.bio-ph physics.flu-dyn

keywords phytofluidic platformroot hydrodynamicsBrassicaROS generationRaman spectroscopyroot elongationradial microchannelsin situ imaging

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper presents a new platform that cultivates multiple seedlings under controlled fluid flow while permitting repeated non-invasive imaging and spectroscopy on the same roots. Experiments demonstrate that flow conditions produce faster root growth, increased reactive oxygen species, directional cell expansion in the cortex, and detectable carotenoid changes compared with static conditions. The design uses radial microchannels that converge on a central sump to equalize resistance and maintain laminar flow with convection-dominated transport. This setup reproduces key rhizosphere features of confinement plus fluid movement in a format that supports throughput and multimodal readout without disturbing neighboring plants.

Core claim

The Plant-on-a-Disc platform enables parallel cultivation of eight seedlings in radial PDMS microchannels under creeping laminar flow. Dimensionless analysis and finite-element modeling establish convection-dominated nutrient transport at physiologically safe shear. Brassica seedlings grown under these flow conditions exhibit accelerated elongation, substantial ROS generation, anisotropic cortical cell expansion, and carotenoid signatures detected by Raman spectroscopy, indicating that hydrodynamic forces drive coordinated responses across molecular, cellular, and organ scales.

What carries the argument

Radial microchannel architecture that equalizes hydraulic resistance across eight parallel channels and establishes convection-dominated transport under laminar flow.

Load-bearing premise

Modeling alone is sufficient to guarantee that the radial channels produce uniform flow and safe shear without direct experimental measurement of velocity profiles across the channels.

What would settle it

Direct particle-image velocimetry or dye-tracer measurements showing velocity variation greater than 20 percent across the eight channels would falsify the claim that the architecture equalizes hydraulic resistance and produces uniform convection-dominated transport.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

Roots under flow elongate faster than roots in static conditions.
Flow triggers measurable increases in reactive oxygen species throughout the root.
Cortical cells expand anisotropically rather than isotropically when exposed to flow.
Raman spectra reveal carotenoid signatures only in flow-grown roots.
The platform supports sequential bright-field, fluorescence, and Raman imaging on intact seedlings without cross-contamination between channels.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same radial layout could be used to compare root responses across different nutrient concentrations or pH values while keeping flow uniform.
Extending the optical window to include additional fluorescence channels might allow simultaneous tracking of multiple stress markers in one experiment.
Because the device is fabricated by a simple wire-drawing method, similar platforms could be produced in other laboratories to test whether the observed flow responses appear in additional crop species.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

The paper introduces a radial microchannel PDMS device for parallel seedling growth under modeled flow with multimodal imaging, but biological claims and flow uniformity rest on unvalidated modeling.

read the letter

The main thing to know is that this describes a new phytofluidic device called POD with eight radial microchannels converging to a central sump, fabricated cheaply in PDMS by wire-drawing. It aims to let researchers grow Brassica seedlings in parallel under hydrodynamic conditions while doing bright-field, fluorescence, and Raman measurements in place.

What is actually new is the radial layout intended to equalize hydraulic resistance across channels, plus the integration of Raman for carotenoid signatures alongside the other modalities without moving plants. The dimensionless analysis and finite-element modeling to argue for creeping laminar flow and convection-dominated transport is a clear step in the design process.

The paper does well on the engineering practicality side. The fabrication method is accessible, and the central optical window setup solves a real throughput problem compared to single-channel systems.

The soft spots are around validation and results. Flow uniformity and safe shear are confirmed only by modeling; no particle tracking, dye tests, or pressure measurements in the actual devices are described, so fabrication tolerances could break the intended conditions. The biological observations—accelerated elongation, ROS generation, anisotropic cell expansion, and carotenoid signals—are presented as driven by flow, but the abstract gives no error bars, controls, or raw data details to assess how tightly they link to the hydrodynamics.

This is for plant biologists or microfluidics labs that want a higher-throughput option for rhizosphere studies. A reader building tools will get the most value from the design choices. It deserves a serious referee to examine the full methods, data, and any added validation experiments.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces the Plant-on-a-Disc (POD) phytofluidic platform fabricated in PDMS via wire-drawing to create radial microchannels for parallel cultivation of eight Brassica seedlings. Dimensionless analysis and finite-element modeling are used to argue that the design equalizes hydraulic resistance, yielding creeping laminar flow with convection-dominated nutrient transport under safe shear. Experimental observations claim that flow conditions produce accelerated root elongation, substantial ROS generation, anisotropic cortical cell expansion, and carotenoid signatures detectable by Raman spectroscopy, all while enabling sequential bright-field, fluorescence, and Raman imaging through a central optical window without disturbing neighboring seedlings.

Significance. If the central claims hold after addressing validation gaps, the POD platform would provide a useful high-throughput tool for studying root integration of mechanical confinement and hydrodynamic transport in the rhizosphere, with the multimodal in-situ analysis capability offering advantages over single-channel or static systems for integrative plant biology.

major comments (1)

[Abstract] Abstract: The attribution of accelerated elongation, ROS generation, anisotropic cell expansion, and carotenoid signatures specifically to hydrodynamic flow requires that the radial microchannel design produces equalized hydraulic resistance and uniform convection-dominated transport across all eight channels. This is asserted solely via dimensionless transport analysis and finite-element modeling; no experimental confirmation (particle tracking, dye tracer, or pressure-drop measurements) in fabricated devices is described. Fabrication variations in the PDMS wire-drawing process could violate the modeled uniformity, decoupling the reported phenotypes from the intended stimulus.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback. The major comment highlights a valid gap in experimental validation of flow uniformity, which we address below by committing to additional experiments in revision.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The attribution of accelerated elongation, ROS generation, anisotropic cell expansion, and carotenoid signatures specifically to hydrodynamic flow requires that the radial microchannel design produces equalized hydraulic resistance and uniform convection-dominated transport across all eight channels. This is asserted solely via dimensionless transport analysis and finite-element modeling; no experimental confirmation (particle tracking, dye tracer, or pressure-drop measurements) in fabricated devices is described. Fabrication variations in the PDMS wire-drawing process could violate the modeled uniformity, decoupling the reported phenotypes from the intended stimulus.

Authors: We agree that the manuscript currently relies exclusively on dimensionless analysis and finite-element modeling without direct experimental measurements (e.g., dye tracing or pressure drops) in the fabricated PDMS devices. Fabrication variations in wire-drawing could indeed affect channel uniformity and thus the attribution of phenotypes to flow. In the revised manuscript we will incorporate experimental validation using dye tracer visualization and/or particle tracking in multiple fabricated devices to confirm equalized resistance and uniform laminar flow across the eight channels. This addition will directly address the concern and strengthen the link between the hydrodynamic stimulus and the observed root responses. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; device description and observations are self-contained

full rationale

The paper describes a microfluidic device fabricated via wire-drawing PDMS and reports observational phenotypes (elongation, ROS, cell expansion, Raman signatures) under flow vs. control conditions. No equations, fitted parameters, or predictions are presented that reduce by construction to inputs. The flow uniformity claim rests on dimensionless analysis plus finite-element modeling (standard external methods, not self-citation or ansatz smuggling). No self-citations are load-bearing, no uniqueness theorems are invoked, and no renaming of known results occurs. The derivation chain is therefore independent of the target claims.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

Abstract-only review limits visibility into parameters and assumptions; listed items extracted directly from abstract statements about device performance and modeling.

axioms (2)

domain assumption Radial architecture equalizes hydraulic resistance across channels
Invoked to establish uniform creeping laminar flow (abstract)
domain assumption Flow produces convection-dominated nutrient transport under physiologically safe shear
Confirmed via dimensionless transport analysis and finite-element modelling (abstract)

invented entities (1)

Plant-on-a-Disc (POD) platform no independent evidence
purpose: Parallel cultivation of seedlings with controlled hydrodynamics and non-invasive multimodal root analysis
New device introduced and demonstrated in the work

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5773 in / 1326 out tokens · 35489 ms · 2026-07-02T01:35:26.766276+00:00 · methodology

0 comments

read the original abstract

Phytofluidic platforms have enabled controlled studies of plant roots, however, most existing systems either impose geometric confinement without flow or introduce hydrodynamics in single-channel devices that limit throughput and disrupt downstream analysis. New experimental platforms are therefore needed to investigate how roots integrate mechanical confinement and hydrodynamic nutrient transport, two defining features of the rhizosphere that remain difficult to reproduce under controlled laboratory conditions. Here, we present the Plant-on-a-Disc (POD), a phytofluidic platform that enables the parallel cultivation of eight seedlings under controlled hydrodynamic conditions while allowing non-invasive, in situ multimodal analysis of the intact root-shoot system. The device is fabricated in PDMS using a cost-effective wire-drawing technique to generate radial microchannels that converge into a central sump beneath an optical window. This design enables sequential bright-field, fluorescence, and Raman measurements using a single microscope objective without disturbing neighbouring seedlings. Dimensionless transport analysis and finite-element modelling confirm that the radial architecture equalizes hydraulic resistance across channels, establishing creeping laminar flow with convection-dominated nutrient transport under physiologically safe shear conditions. Using Brassica seedlings, we show that hydrodynamic flow drives coordinated root responses across multiple scales. Roots grown in flow condition exhibit accelerated elongation, substantial ROS generation and anisotropic cortical cell expansion, accompanied by carotenoid signatures detected by Raman spectroscopy.

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

15 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

[1]

1 E. Kolb, M. Quiros, G. J. Meijer, M. B. Bogeat-Triboulot, A. Carminati, E. Andò, L. Sibille and F. Anselmucci, in Soft Matter in Plants, The Royal Society of Chemistry, 2022, pp. 165–202. 2 H. Zhang, X. Yan, M. Zhang, Y. Zhao, S. Jiang, Y. Jiang, Y. Wei, Y. Zhang and L. Sun, J. Agric. Food Chem., 2025, 73, 30895–30903. 3 A. Pierret and C. J. Moran, in E...

work page 2022
[2]

Alonso-Serra, New Phytol., 2026, 249, 722–728

7 J. Alonso-Serra, New Phytol., 2026, 249, 722–728. 8 A. A. Cardoso, M. T. Andrade, E. R. Bucior and S. C. V. Martins, Plant Physiol., 2025, 199, kiaf521. 9 J. Joshi, B. D. Stocker, F. Hofhansl, S. Zhou, U. Dieckmann and I. C. Prentice, Nat. Plants, 2022, 8, 1304–1316. 10 A. Sampathkumar, A. Yan, P. Krupinski and E. M. Meyerowitz, Curr. Biol., 2014, 24, R...

work page 2026
[3]

12 P. J. Gregory, Physiol. Determ. Crop yield, 1994, 65–93. 13 B. K. Pandey, T. S. George, H. V. Cooper, C. J. Sturrock, T. Bennett and M. J. Bennett, J. Exp. Bot., 2025, 76, 1500–1509. 14 J. P. Lynch, C. F. Strock, H. M. Schneider, J. S. Sidhu, I. Ajmera, T. Galindo-Castañeda, S. P. Klein and M. T. Hanlon, Plant Soil, 2021, 466, 21–63. 15 R. Shen, B. Bor...

work page 1994
[4]

17 A. G. Hunt and M. Sahimi, Rev. Geophys., 2017, 55, 993–1078. 18 P. Voothuluru, Y. Wu and R. E. Sharp, Plant Cell, 2024, 36, 1377–1409. 19 R. Karlova, D. Boer, S. Hayes and C. Testerink, Plant Physiol., 2021, 187, 1057–1070. 20 A. Erktan, D. Or and S. Scheu, Soil Biol. Biochem., 2020, 148, 107876. 21 P. Mehra, J. Banda, L. L. P. Ogorek, R. Fusi, G. Cast...

work page 2017
[5]

Panja, S

30 S. Panja, S. K. Mehta, J. Kalita, M. K. Prasad and P. K. Mondal, Phys. Fluids, 2024, 36, 111914. 31 K. Agarwal, S. K. Mehta and P. K. Mondal, Lab Chip, 2024, 24, 3775–3789. 32 P. Padhi, S. K. Mehta, K. Agarwal and P. K. Mondal, Phys. Fluids, 2024, 36, 043602. 33 S. K. Mehta, A. Talukdar, S. Panja, J. Kalita, S. Wongwises and P. K. Mondal, Soft Matter, ...

work page 2024
[6]

38 M. Zhu, C. W. Hsu, L. L. Peralta Ogorek, I. W. Taylor, S. La Cavera, D. M. Oliveira, L. Verma, P. Mehra, M. Mijar, A. Sadanandom, F. Perez-Cota, W. Boerjan, T. M. Nolan, M. J. Bennett, P. N. Benfey and B. K. Pandey, Nature, 2025, 642, 721–729. 39 L. Ma, Y. Shi, O. Siemianowski, B. Yuan, T. K. Egner, S. V. Mirnezami, K. R. Lind, B. Ganapathysubramanian,...

work page 2025
[7]

44 D. C. Trinh, J. Alonso-Serra, M. Asaoka, L. Colin, M. Cortes, A. Malivert, S. Takatani, F. Zhao, J. Traas, C. Trehin and O. Hamant, Curr. Biol., 2021, 31, R143–R159. 45 Y. Yan, Z. Sun, P. Yan, T. Wang and Y. Zhang, New Phytol., 2023, 239, 1609–1621. 46 A. Sampathkumar, Dev., 2020, 147, dev177964. 47 V. Mirabet, P. Das, A. Boudaoud and O. Hamant, Annu. ...

work page 2021
[8]

48 M. A. Andersen and J. Schouenborg, Sci. Rep., 2023, 13, 1–12. 49 I. Miranda, A. Souza, P. Sousa, J. Ribeiro, E. M. S. Castanheira, R. Lima and G. Minas, J. Funct. Biomater., 2022, 13,

work page 2023
[9]

50 S. H. Song, C. K. Lee, T. J. Kim, I. C. Shin, S. C. Jun and H. Il Jung, Microfluid. Nanofluidics, 2010, 9, 533–540. 51 D. Mandal, S. Datta, G. Raveendar, P. K. Mondal and R. Nag Chaudhuri, Plant J., 2023, 113, 106–126. 52 M. Kafi and Z. Rahimi, Soil Sci. Plant Nutr., 2011, 57, 341–347. 53 L. G. Angelini, C. Clemente and S. Tavarini, Agric., 2021, 11,

work page 2010
[10]

54 R. J. McMurtrey, Tissue Eng. Part C. Methods, 2016, 22, 221–249. 55 C. M. Vera and M. V. Mendoza, Brazilian J. Chem. Eng., 2025, 42, 1143–1158. 34 56 M. M. Naderi, H. Gao, J. Zhou, I. Papautsky and Z. Peng, Lab Chip, 2025, 25, 2874–

work page 2016
[11]

57 J. X. J. Zhang and K. Hoshino, in Micro and Nano Technologies, eds. J. X. J. Zhang and K. B. T.-M. S. and N. (Second E. Hoshino, Academic Press, 2019, pp. 113–179. 58 B. Khatoon, Shabih-Ul-Hasan and M. S. Alam, in 14 International Symposium on Process Systems Engineering, eds. Y. Yamashita and M. B. T.-C. A. C. E. Kano, Elsevier, 2022, vol. 49, pp. 691...

work page 2019
[12]

65 D. L. Gelardi, I. H. Ainuddin, D. A. Rippner, J. E. Patiño, M. A. Najm and S. J. Parikh, Soil, 2021, 7, 811–825. 66 J. Jehlička and A. Oren, Front. Microbiol., 2013, 4,

work page 2021
[13]

Hsieh, K.-J

67 T.-F. Hsieh, K.-J. Yu and S.-Y. Lin, Dis. Markers, 2007, 23, 705630. 68 A. Jarin, U. K. Ghosh, M. S. Hossain, A. Mahmud and M. A. R. Khan, Discov. Agric., 2024, 2,

work page 2007
[14]

69 W. Z. Payne and D. Kurouski, Front. Plant Sci., 2021, 11, 616672. 70 E. Wiercigroch, E. Szafraniec, K. Czamara, M. Z. Pacia, K. Majzner, K. Kochan, A. Kaczor, M. Baranska and K. Malek, Spectrochim. Acta - Part A Mol. Biomol. Spectrosc., 2017, 185, 317–335. 71 J. El-Azaz, B. Moore, Y. Takeda-Kimura, R. Yokoyama, M. Wijesingha Ahchige, X. Chen, M. Schnei...

work page 2021
[15]

72 C. Zhou, J. R. Diers and D. F. Bocian, J. Phys. Chem. B, 1997, 101, 9635–9644. 73 Z.-L. Cai, H. Zeng, M. Chen and A. W. D. Larkum, Biochim. Biophys. Acta - Bioenerg., 2002, 1556, 89–91. 74 E. H. Murchie and T. Lawson, J. Exp. Bot., 2013, 64, 3983–3998. 75 M. A. Naseer, S. Hussain, A. Mukhtar, Q. Rui, G. Ru, H. Ahmad, Z. Q. Zhang, L. B. Shi, M. S. Asad,...

work page 1997

[1] [1]

1 E. Kolb, M. Quiros, G. J. Meijer, M. B. Bogeat-Triboulot, A. Carminati, E. Andò, L. Sibille and F. Anselmucci, in Soft Matter in Plants, The Royal Society of Chemistry, 2022, pp. 165–202. 2 H. Zhang, X. Yan, M. Zhang, Y. Zhao, S. Jiang, Y. Jiang, Y. Wei, Y. Zhang and L. Sun, J. Agric. Food Chem., 2025, 73, 30895–30903. 3 A. Pierret and C. J. Moran, in E...

work page 2022

[2] [2]

Alonso-Serra, New Phytol., 2026, 249, 722–728

7 J. Alonso-Serra, New Phytol., 2026, 249, 722–728. 8 A. A. Cardoso, M. T. Andrade, E. R. Bucior and S. C. V. Martins, Plant Physiol., 2025, 199, kiaf521. 9 J. Joshi, B. D. Stocker, F. Hofhansl, S. Zhou, U. Dieckmann and I. C. Prentice, Nat. Plants, 2022, 8, 1304–1316. 10 A. Sampathkumar, A. Yan, P. Krupinski and E. M. Meyerowitz, Curr. Biol., 2014, 24, R...

work page 2026

[3] [3]

12 P. J. Gregory, Physiol. Determ. Crop yield, 1994, 65–93. 13 B. K. Pandey, T. S. George, H. V. Cooper, C. J. Sturrock, T. Bennett and M. J. Bennett, J. Exp. Bot., 2025, 76, 1500–1509. 14 J. P. Lynch, C. F. Strock, H. M. Schneider, J. S. Sidhu, I. Ajmera, T. Galindo-Castañeda, S. P. Klein and M. T. Hanlon, Plant Soil, 2021, 466, 21–63. 15 R. Shen, B. Bor...

work page 1994

[4] [4]

17 A. G. Hunt and M. Sahimi, Rev. Geophys., 2017, 55, 993–1078. 18 P. Voothuluru, Y. Wu and R. E. Sharp, Plant Cell, 2024, 36, 1377–1409. 19 R. Karlova, D. Boer, S. Hayes and C. Testerink, Plant Physiol., 2021, 187, 1057–1070. 20 A. Erktan, D. Or and S. Scheu, Soil Biol. Biochem., 2020, 148, 107876. 21 P. Mehra, J. Banda, L. L. P. Ogorek, R. Fusi, G. Cast...

work page 2017

[5] [5]

Panja, S

30 S. Panja, S. K. Mehta, J. Kalita, M. K. Prasad and P. K. Mondal, Phys. Fluids, 2024, 36, 111914. 31 K. Agarwal, S. K. Mehta and P. K. Mondal, Lab Chip, 2024, 24, 3775–3789. 32 P. Padhi, S. K. Mehta, K. Agarwal and P. K. Mondal, Phys. Fluids, 2024, 36, 043602. 33 S. K. Mehta, A. Talukdar, S. Panja, J. Kalita, S. Wongwises and P. K. Mondal, Soft Matter, ...

work page 2024

[6] [6]

38 M. Zhu, C. W. Hsu, L. L. Peralta Ogorek, I. W. Taylor, S. La Cavera, D. M. Oliveira, L. Verma, P. Mehra, M. Mijar, A. Sadanandom, F. Perez-Cota, W. Boerjan, T. M. Nolan, M. J. Bennett, P. N. Benfey and B. K. Pandey, Nature, 2025, 642, 721–729. 39 L. Ma, Y. Shi, O. Siemianowski, B. Yuan, T. K. Egner, S. V. Mirnezami, K. R. Lind, B. Ganapathysubramanian,...

work page 2025

[7] [7]

44 D. C. Trinh, J. Alonso-Serra, M. Asaoka, L. Colin, M. Cortes, A. Malivert, S. Takatani, F. Zhao, J. Traas, C. Trehin and O. Hamant, Curr. Biol., 2021, 31, R143–R159. 45 Y. Yan, Z. Sun, P. Yan, T. Wang and Y. Zhang, New Phytol., 2023, 239, 1609–1621. 46 A. Sampathkumar, Dev., 2020, 147, dev177964. 47 V. Mirabet, P. Das, A. Boudaoud and O. Hamant, Annu. ...

work page 2021

[8] [8]

48 M. A. Andersen and J. Schouenborg, Sci. Rep., 2023, 13, 1–12. 49 I. Miranda, A. Souza, P. Sousa, J. Ribeiro, E. M. S. Castanheira, R. Lima and G. Minas, J. Funct. Biomater., 2022, 13,

work page 2023

[9] [9]

50 S. H. Song, C. K. Lee, T. J. Kim, I. C. Shin, S. C. Jun and H. Il Jung, Microfluid. Nanofluidics, 2010, 9, 533–540. 51 D. Mandal, S. Datta, G. Raveendar, P. K. Mondal and R. Nag Chaudhuri, Plant J., 2023, 113, 106–126. 52 M. Kafi and Z. Rahimi, Soil Sci. Plant Nutr., 2011, 57, 341–347. 53 L. G. Angelini, C. Clemente and S. Tavarini, Agric., 2021, 11,

work page 2010

[10] [10]

54 R. J. McMurtrey, Tissue Eng. Part C. Methods, 2016, 22, 221–249. 55 C. M. Vera and M. V. Mendoza, Brazilian J. Chem. Eng., 2025, 42, 1143–1158. 34 56 M. M. Naderi, H. Gao, J. Zhou, I. Papautsky and Z. Peng, Lab Chip, 2025, 25, 2874–

work page 2016

[11] [11]

57 J. X. J. Zhang and K. Hoshino, in Micro and Nano Technologies, eds. J. X. J. Zhang and K. B. T.-M. S. and N. (Second E. Hoshino, Academic Press, 2019, pp. 113–179. 58 B. Khatoon, Shabih-Ul-Hasan and M. S. Alam, in 14 International Symposium on Process Systems Engineering, eds. Y. Yamashita and M. B. T.-C. A. C. E. Kano, Elsevier, 2022, vol. 49, pp. 691...

work page 2019

[12] [12]

65 D. L. Gelardi, I. H. Ainuddin, D. A. Rippner, J. E. Patiño, M. A. Najm and S. J. Parikh, Soil, 2021, 7, 811–825. 66 J. Jehlička and A. Oren, Front. Microbiol., 2013, 4,

work page 2021

[13] [13]

Hsieh, K.-J

67 T.-F. Hsieh, K.-J. Yu and S.-Y. Lin, Dis. Markers, 2007, 23, 705630. 68 A. Jarin, U. K. Ghosh, M. S. Hossain, A. Mahmud and M. A. R. Khan, Discov. Agric., 2024, 2,

work page 2007

[14] [14]

69 W. Z. Payne and D. Kurouski, Front. Plant Sci., 2021, 11, 616672. 70 E. Wiercigroch, E. Szafraniec, K. Czamara, M. Z. Pacia, K. Majzner, K. Kochan, A. Kaczor, M. Baranska and K. Malek, Spectrochim. Acta - Part A Mol. Biomol. Spectrosc., 2017, 185, 317–335. 71 J. El-Azaz, B. Moore, Y. Takeda-Kimura, R. Yokoyama, M. Wijesingha Ahchige, X. Chen, M. Schnei...

work page 2021

[15] [15]

72 C. Zhou, J. R. Diers and D. F. Bocian, J. Phys. Chem. B, 1997, 101, 9635–9644. 73 Z.-L. Cai, H. Zeng, M. Chen and A. W. D. Larkum, Biochim. Biophys. Acta - Bioenerg., 2002, 1556, 89–91. 74 E. H. Murchie and T. Lawson, J. Exp. Bot., 2013, 64, 3983–3998. 75 M. A. Naseer, S. Hussain, A. Mukhtar, Q. Rui, G. Ru, H. Ahmad, Z. Q. Zhang, L. B. Shi, M. S. Asad,...

work page 1997