Recovery of Soil Test Phosphorus from an Acidic Soil Amended with Organic and Inorganic Phosphorus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Information on soil test phosphorus (P) in soil treated with organic amendments is important to a sound management of manure additions to agricultural fields. This study compared the recovery of cow manure, chicken manure, city compost P relative to triple super phosphate P (TSP) for an acidic soil with different antecedent soil test P (STP). Phosphorus was added at rates of 0, 100, 200, 400 and 800 mg P kg-1 soil based on total P. The soil was incubated at field capacity for 1, 4, 8 and 16 weeks (wk) after which they were extracted using NaHCO3 (Olsen) Mehlich-3, Kelowna and Bray & Kurtz-1 extractants. Regardless of extractants, after 1 wk incubation, the highest STP source was the TSP and the least was the city compost. Soil Test P increased with the addition of amendments from different P sources. Among the amendments, soil test P in TSP amended soil gradually decreased but in the city compost amended soil slightly in- creased with incubation time, whereas the changes of soil test P with time in the cow and chicken manures amended soil was very negligible. Across the amendments and rates of P additions, the value of extractable P with Olsen was of 55 mg kg-1 (16%), with Mehlich-3 was of 112 mg kg-1 (32%), with Kelowna was of 88 mg kg-1 (24%) and with Bray & Kurtz was of 104 mg kg-1 (29% of total added P). The P extraction efficiency was in the order: NaHCO3 Kelowna
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".