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