MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1574338480 · doi:10.1080/1065657x.2013.785195

Transport of Residual Soluble Salts and Total Sulfur through Intact Soil Cores Amended with Fresh or Composted Beef Cattle Feedlot Manure for Nine Years

2013· article· en· W1574338480 on OpenAlexaff
J.J. Miller, Bruce Beasley, C. F. Drury

Bibliographic record

VenueCompost Science & Utilization · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicComposting and Vermicomposting Techniques
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeedlotManureLoamChemistryBeef cattleEffluentSulfurAnimal scienceSoil waterAgronomyEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryEnvironmental engineeringSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Composting of beef cattle (Bos Taurus) manure may increase the soluble salt (Ca, Mg, Na, K) and total sulfur (S) content and increase transport through the soil. Little research has been conducted on comparing transport of these chemicals through soil amended with composted (CM) manure versus fresh feedlot manure stockpiled for up to two months (FM). Our objective was to determine if the transport of these chemicals was greater for CM compared to FM when annually applied at 77 Mg ha−1 dry wt. for nine years to a clay loam soil. Intact soil cores were taken from a field experiment in the spring of 2007. Deionized water was applied to the soil cores in the laboratory under steady-state (4.9 cm d−1) and unsaturated conditions. Residual chemical concentrations in effluent were measured and breakthrough curves and cumulative mass loss curves obtained. The peak concentrations of K and total S; flow-weighted mean concentration (FWMC) and mass loss for Na, K, and total S; and recovery of Mg, Na, K, and t...

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.051
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.225 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCompost Science & UtilizationSame topicComposting and Vermicomposting TechniquesFrench-language works237,207