100 1 To T | rn I | 4 a '& 80 So fer & a J - o> a S a Om 60K mH 7 PO sa Oo E uy ES =< ® or | - i | WW A CF = 0.4847 40h _ A wp 2 oD -| 55 aod & uo ? a 88 20;-= Linear regression line y = 0.342% + 4,189 { 0. 0 A | 50 a 25 » i | 75 ! 3 100 Concentration in soil — pCi/g dry weight Fig. 8. Correlation of the Sr concentration in mature Seaevolta and Messer- sehmidia leaves with the concentration of 29Sr in the soil at the same site. result of the complete disruption of regardless of the side of the plant the upper soil layers by clearing, from which they were taken construction, and testing over the In contrast, past 30 years as well as by more area but not in direct contact with recent agricultural practices. To profiles in (Table 5). the general the root system of the plant sample determine the soil concentrations of are highly variable (Table 6). nuclides that are actually available Tables 7 and 8 present the range to the root system of a specific and median values of concentration plant, we sampled soil profiles in Factors calculated for vegetation and direct contact with the root system. soil sampled from the same location. The two replicate samples of soil . profiles show minimal variation, Table 9 compares these -19- tables with the information from the same information