MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981254693 · doi:10.2135/cropsci2005.05-0074

Atmospheric Composition under Impermeable Winter Golf Green Protections

2006· article· en· W1981254693 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Philippe Rochette, Julie Dionne, Yves Castonguay, Yves Desjardins

Bibliographic record

VenueCrop Science · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicTurfgrass Adaptation and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalCanadian Armed ForcesAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMcMaster University
KeywordsAnoxic watersEnvironmental scienceSoil waterAgronomyBiologySnowMulchStrawHorticultureEcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The utilization of impermeable winter covers on annual bluegrass [Poa annua var. reptans (Hauskn.) Timm.] golf greens as a protection against excess water and ice is increasing rapidly in Canada and elsewhere in northern climates. A study was conducted to examine the impact of these covers on the atmospheric composition over golf green turfgrass during the 1997–1998 and 1998–1999 winters in Québec City and in Montréal, Canada. Winter protective covers tested included a commercial impermeable cover on top of either curled wood shavings mat (CW‐CC), 15 cm of straw mulch (SM‐CC) or a felt material (FM‐CC), a clear polyethylene cover on top of a curled wood shavings mat (CW‐PC), and an unprotected control. Oxygen was consumed at variable rates under impermeable winter protective covers. As a result, anoxic conditions were not reached during winter at the Québec City site but high respiration rates at the Montréal site resulted in anoxic conditions that lasted for periods as long as 50 d, without apparent damage to the annual bluegrass plants. Further tests were conducted on greens experiencing recurrent damages that could not be explained by freezing temperatures, snow mold pathogens, excess water, or ice. We showed that these problem greens had higher soil respiration rates than nonproblem greens indicating that the differences in O2 consumption amongst golf greens are likely due to differences in soil biological activity rather than in plant respiration. We also established that the higher activity in soils of recurrently damaged greens was related to higher levels of soil organic C. Accordingly, sand‐based golf greens built according to the USGA specifications had lower soil organic matter and lower respiration rates than greens built on native soils. We conclude that high rates of O2 consumption by golf greens with high soil organic matter content results in potentially harmful anoxic conditions under impermeable covers during winter.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score0.821

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations16
Published2006
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrop ScienceSame topicTurfgrass Adaptation and ManagementFrench-language works237,207