Composting of Crucifer Wastes Using Geotextile Covers
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Composting trials were undertaken in 1994 – 996 in Ste. Anne de Bellevue, Quebec, to study the feasibility of using crucifer or carrot residues with sawdust or straw for composting. Geotextile covers were tested for their influence on different parameters of the composting process. Two complete composting cycles from fall to summer were monitored. Measurements were taken for compost temperature, moisture, and leachate. Chemical analyses were performed on compost samples. Phytotoxicity tests were done with compost leachate samples. The results indicated that temperatures of covered compost (CC) decreased more slowly during late fall and early winter than non-covered compost (NC). In addition, CC did not freeze to as great a depth during the winter, and warmed earlier and faster than NC in the spring. The moisture content of CC was significantly lower than in NC at the end of both composting cycles. CC had a higher mineral content than NC in both cycles, and the levels of total N, P, K and NO3 were significantly higher for CC in the second cycle. The carbon/nitrogen (C/N) ratio of CC decreased earlier and reached a lower level at the end of the composting cycle. The quantity of leachate from CC was significantly reduced compared to NC in the second cycle. Compost leachate in both treatments showed a high level of phytotoxicity at the beginning of the composting cycle. However, there was no evidence that compost covers influenced the phytotoxicity in leachate throughout the composting cycle. The use of covers could translate into economic or environmental benefits for most composting operations.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it