Dynamics of Pig Slurry Nitrogen in Soil and Plant as Determined with <sup>15</sup> N
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The fate of pig ( Sus scrofa ) slurry labeled with 15 N was investigated when applied on a clay soil (fine, mixed, frigid, Typic Humaquept) and a sandy loam (loamy, mixed, frigid, Typic Dystrochrept) cropped to maize ( Zea mays L.) in 2000 and to barley ( Hordeum vulgare L.) in 2001. The slurry was applied in spring 2000, and plant and soil samples were collected at 6 h (Day 1) and at Days 14, 42, 96, and 413 after application. The samples were analyzed for 15 N content in plant, in whole soil, and in soil NH 4 + –N, NO 3 − –N, organic N, and clay‐fixed N pools. Percentage 15 N recovery was >93% in both soils at Day 1 and decreased slowly thereafter. Rapid clay fixation of slurry 15 N occurred at Day 1, and was greater in the clay soil (34% of applied 15 N) than in the sandy loam (11%). At Day 96, less of the applied slurry 15 N was recovered in maize grown on the clay soil (29%), as compared with the sandy loam (50%). At the same period, the residual soil 15 N was mostly present as organic N and NO 3 − –N in the sandy loam, and as organic and clay‐fixed N in the clay soil. At Day 413, 15 N recovery in barley was about 3% of the initially applied N in both soils. The 15 N recovery was generally higher in the clay soil than in the sandy loam, but total 15 N recovery from the soil–plant system was similar for both soils. We conclude that soil type had little influence on the total 15 N recovery from the soil–plant system, but significantly influenced the fate of slurry N in the various soil pools and plant N uptake on the year of application.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".