Effects of Cedrus atlantica and Pinus halepensis on the chemistry and fertility of a Mediterranean soil after 40 years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, a comparison between Pinus halepensis Miller and Cedrus atlantica (Endl) Carrière in reforested sites was carried out. Our major objectives were to study soil organic matter in the two stands to determine whether significant biochemical modifications of the C cycle occurred since stand establishment, and to evaluate the effect of the two tree species on soil formation.The study area is part of the Sicani range (western Sicily, Italy), and is characterised by homogeneous environmental features (topography, geology, slope, exposition, climate, etc.). Ten profiles were sampled in a plantation of Pinus halepensisand one of Cedrus atlanticafor each stand. Microbial biomass activity (qCO2, and Cmic:Corg), organic C contents, and organic C mineralization rates were compared between the Ah and Bw horizons of the soils in the two stands. The microbial biomass activity in A-horizons differed appreciably. The metabolic quotient was higher under Pinushalepensis while the Cmic to Corg ratio was higher under Cedrus atlantica, which indicated a possible stressed condition for soil microbial biomass in the Pinus halepensisstand The turnover of decomposable C did not differ significantly between the two soils, but the A-horizons of the Cedrus atlantica site appeared poorer in total organic C content. Key Words: Forest soil, soil chemistry, soil fertility, soil-vegetation relationship, organic matter dynamics, soil microbial biomass
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".