{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.0247074122236671, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007802340702210663, 'mean_word_length': 5.691304347826087, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Botanical Iron Biominerals: Electron Diffraction and Microscopy Identification

Characterization of soil profiles often shows enhanced magnetism in the topsoil, attributed to higher concentrations of ultra-fine grained ferrimagnetic iron oxides. An inorganic [1] and a bacterial [2] route have been suggested for the formation of nanocrystalline magnetite in soil, and the soil magnetite controversy is considered unresolved. The discovery of magnetite nanocrystals in the famous Martian meteor ALH 84001 [3], and their assignment as possible signs of ancient bacterial life on Mars, has fueled renewed interest in the fundamental question how to distinguish nanocrystalline biominerals from their equivalent nanocrystalline minerals. The distinguishing parameters appear to be the nanocrystal morphology, size distribution, and self-assembly. Based on the first two properties, all terrestrial and extraterrestrial biogenic magnetite is currently attributed to magnetic bacteria and their magnetofossils. However, both the Martian magnetite and the majority of soil magnetite nanocrystals do not display the tell-tale linear self-assembly of bacterial magnetite. Soil by definition supports plant life and it is known that plants, like microbes and animals, use and store iron in their cells. Magnetite nanocrystals have recently been found in animals [4] and humans [5], and we reported the discovery of botanical magnetite [6,7]. Here we summarize our recent reported findings and plan to present new results from our ongoing research.