Phosphorus amounts and distribution in a Saskatchewan soil after five years of swine and cattle manure application
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Repeated application of animal manures to Saskatchewan soils has led to interest in the fate and distribution of residual manure P in the soil. The concentrations of soil phosphorus in various inorganic and organic fractions were investigated in soils sampled from long-term field research plots (Dixon, SK) with a 5-yr history of annual application of liquid swine manure or solid cattle manure at low, medium and high rates. The soil type at the research site is a loamy textured Black Chernozem (Cudworth Association). Annual rates of manure application over the 5 yr were based on the N contents in the manures and were equivalent to 0 (control), and approximately 100 (low), 200 (medium) and 400 (high) kg total N ha -1 yr -1 as manure. For comparison, urea alone was also applied at rates of 50, 100 and 200 kg N ha -1 yr -1 . The total P concentration in the surface soil (0&ndash15 cm) was significantly increased only by the addition of cattle manure and only in the medium and high rate treatments compared to the control. The most labile P fractions (Resin-P and NaHCO 3 -P) were also significantly increased with increasing rate of cattle manure addition. No significant increases in either soil total P or labile P fractions were observed in liquid swine manure treatments, which is attributed to the lower amount of P added with the swine manure treatment than the cattle manure treatment. Added P in the swine manure treatment more closely matched P removal in crop harvest compared to cattle manure treatment, which had more P added than was removed by the crop. Key words: Phosphorus fractions, labile P fraction, sequential P extraction, urea, swine manure, cattle manure
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".