Effect of swine manure and urea on soil phosphorus supply to canola
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limited information exists as to the effect of liquid swine manure on soil phosphorus (P) availability in Western Canadian soil. Swine manure is most often applied to meet additional requirements for nitrogen (N) and research to date has emphasized N effects. The effect of swine manure and urea on P supply to canola was investigated under controlled environment condition. Canola (Brassica napus) was grown in pots with manure or urea added to two Saskatchewan soils (sandy loam and clay loam) at 0 and 100 mg N kg‐1. Plants were grown to maturity, and yield and nutrient content were determined. Phosphorus supply rates in soils were measured in the pots using anion exchange resin membrane probes. Additions of swine manure and urea enhanced canola P accumulation and led to a higher proportion of P in seeds. This response was more evident in the manure treatment than with urea. Soil amended with manure significantly increased N and P supply rates in soils as the manure contains N and P. On the contrary, application of urea significantly increased N supply rate, but led to a slight decrease in the measured soil supply rate of available P. Despite the apparent decrease in soil supply of available P in urea treatment, canola maintained its N:P ratio by increasing P absorption, possibly due to a greater root mass.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".