MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997906361 · doi:10.1002/jpln.200321135

Efficiency parameters of nitrogen in hog and cattle manure in the second year following application

2003· article· en· W1997906361 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Guang Wen, J.J. Schoenau, J. Charles, Shinobu Inanaga

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Plant Nutrition and Soil Science · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersInnovation SaskatchewanMinistry of Agriculture - Saskatchewan
KeywordsManureCanolaAgronomyBrassicaNitrogenCropHuman fertilizationGreen manureEnvironmental scienceChemistryAnimal scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The efficiency of nitrogen (N) derived from different manures in the years following application must be determined to optimize use of N and reduce impact on the environment. Five N efficiency parameters that were originally developed for commercial inorganic N fertilizers were selected to measure the manure N efficiency in the second year following application of liquid hog and solid cattle manure in semiarid east‐central Saskatchewan, Canada. The manures were applied at two sites (Dixon and Burr) at four rates covering a range from zero to 912 kg N ha –1 in 1997. A canola ( Brassica napus L.) crop was grown in 1997 followed by a spring wheat ( Triticum aestivum L.) in 1998 without fertilization. Tested by the wheat, N utilization efficiency (NUE) was similar between the two manures at either site, but it was higher at Dixon site, where the soil properties were better, than at the Burr site (P < 0.07) with cattle manure. Nitrogen physiological efficiency (NPE) was not affected by either manure source or soil. At the Burr site, N agronomic efficiency (NAE) and N recovery rate (NRR) were all higher with the hog than with the cattle manure ( P < 0.08 and P < 0.07, respectively), but N harvest index (NHI) was lower with the hog than with the cattle manure ( P < 0.04). The similar trends of the NAE, NRR, and NHI between the hog and cattle manure were also found at the Dixon site. However, the differences in NRR between the hog and cattle manure in the second year was rather small in contrast to the large differences in the year of application. Despite that the wheat crop utilized residual hog and cattle manure N equally efficient in producing grain yield, a higher grain N concentration and a higher NHI with the cattle than with the hog manure revealed different N supply dynamics between the two. Possibly due to the low proportion of ammonium (NH 3 )‐N in the total N and the high C : N ratio in the cattle manure, mineralization of cattle manure N provided more available N in the later stage of wheat growth than did the hog manure. The N efficiency parameters were useful tools in understanding the impact of residual manure N on wheat production on the Canadian prairies.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations29
Published2003
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Plant Nutrition and Soil ScienceSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207