MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1972645391 · doi:10.4141/s05-048

Response of the Illinois Soil Nitrogen Test to liquid and composted dairy manure applications in a corn agroecosystem

2006· article· en· W1972645391 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jonathan H. Klapwyk, Quirine M. Ketterings, Greg Godwin, Dishan Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsManureCompostAgronomyNutrientAgroecosystemNitrogenFertilizerAnimal scienceEnvironmental scienceChemistryBiologyAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dairy manure is important for corn (Zea mays L.) production in New York. Optimizing corn yield while minimizing environmental loss with manure nutrients is often a challenge. A potential tool for improving N management is the Illinois Soil Nitrogen Test (ISNT), which estimates amino sugar N, a pool of potentially mineralizable N for corn uptake. The objectives of this study were to determine (1) the short-term effects of manure applications on ISNT-N, and (2) the longer-term impacts of annual additions of composted and liquid dairy manure on ISNT-N. A 6-wk incubation study showed that NH 4 -N from manure temporarily (< 2 wk) increased ISNT results. A 4-yr field study was conducted with annual spring applications of two rates of composted dairy manure (45 and 77 Mg ha -1 ) and two liquid dairy manure rates (63.5 and 180 kL ha -1 ). Results showed that ISNT-N slightly decreased over time in check plots (no manure or fertilizer additions) and that increases in ISNT-N over time in compost and liquid manure amended plots were consistent with changes in N credits currently given to manures in New York. Our results suggest that the ISNT accounts for N in previously applied compost and manure amendments, but that samples should not be taken within 2-wk following manure addition. Key words: Amino sugar, compost, Illinois Soil Nitrogen Test, nitrogen, manure, nutrient management

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.984

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations32
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Soil ScienceSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207