A Four-Year Study on Influence of Biosolids/MSW Cocompost Application in Less Productive Soils In Alberta: Nutrient Dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Composting municipal solid waste and biosolids and applying it on arable land have become an alternative way to treat waste in large municipalities in North America. However, cost of compost transportation and application constrains the compost use on the land further away from where it is produced. A four-year experiment was conducted (1998-2001) in less productive soils in Alberta to determine the effect of once in four year application of cocompost on soil nutrient dynamics and crop N uptakes. There were three crop blocks: barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), wheat (Triticum aestivum L), and canola (Brassica rapa), and they were rotated annually. The compost was only applied in 1998 at a rate of 50, 100 and 200 t/ha. Soil samples were taken in spring of every year after initial compost application to determine extractable N, P, K, S, Cu, Zn, Soil pH and EC. Each year, crops were harvested and N uptake was determined. Total concentrations of an array of heavy metals in the first year and fourth year after compost application were determined as well. The results showed that the release of N from the compost was high in the first year after compost application and then declined in each subsequent year. Similar to that release pattern was sulphur. The release of phosphorus from compost was steady throughout the four-year experimental time. Crop N uptake from compost application varied with crops and sites. The over all N use efficiency for three crops and two sites was 11%, 3%, 1% and 2% for the first and subsequent three years. The total heavy metal concentrations in the compost amended soils in the first and fourth year after compost application were similar, and they were below the standard of Canadian Fertilizer Act. Our results showed that N released from compost occurred mostly in the first two years after application, suggesting that an application frequency of once in every second year may be better than the once in every four year application strategy, especially with 100 t/ha application rate.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".