MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1974761632 · doi:10.4236/ojss.2014.43014

Evaluation of Available Phosphorus by Soil Test Methods in an Acidic Soil Incubated with Different Levels of Lime and Phosphorus

2014· article· en· W1974761632 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ashoka Sarker, Md. Abul Kashem, Khan Towhid Osman, Imam Hossain, Farzana Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Journal of Soil Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLimePhosphorusSoil testChemistrySoil waterAnimal scienceIncubationSoil pHEnvironmental chemistryAgronomyEnvironmental scienceSoil scienceBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An incubation study was conducted in laboratory to determine the effect of lime (L) as CaCO3 and phosphorus (P) as TSP on soil pH and available soil P in an acid soil. Four rates of L equivalent to 0, 1, 2 and 3 ton CaCO3 ha-1 and four rates of P equivalent to 0, 25, 50 and 75 mg P kg-1 were applied in combinations as treatments. The soil was incubated at field capacity for 8 weeks (wk) after which they were extracted using NaHCO3 (Olsen), Mehlich-3, Kelowna and Bray & Kurtz-1 extractants and soil pH was determined. Lime significantly (P -1 gave the highest available phosphorus. Mehlich-3 method extracted the largest amount of P (14.54 - 67.35 mg·kg-1) while Olsen extracted the smallest amount (3.25 - 32.77 mg·kg-1). The mean extractable P in soils was found to be in the order of Olsen 2 = 0.87 to 0.95).

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations27
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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