MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005032683 · doi:10.4141/cjss09015

Identifying appropriate methodology to diagnose aeration limitations with large peat and bark particles in growing media

2010· article· en· W2005032683 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPolymer-Based Agricultural Enhancements
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersInstitut National de la Recherche Agronomique
KeywordsPeatSawdustAerationBark (sound)SphagnumThermal diffusivityBulk densityEnvironmental scienceChemistryHorticulturePulp and paper industrySoil scienceBiologyEcologySoil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Large-sized particles (coarse peat, bark or sawdust) are often added to growing media to improve substrate aeration properties (gas storage and exchange). Recent studies have shown that large fragments mixed with fines may create barriers that restrict gas diffusion or create competition for oxygen even if they improve air storage. An experiment was carried out to compare the growth performances of growing media containing large fragments and to assess their aeration status using different methods. Different mixes were made of a fine sphagnum peat (average size 2.4 mm) and a coarse (1-2, 2-4, 4-6, 6-10, and 10-20 mm particles) sphagnum peat or bark (2-4 and 10-20 mm). These substrates had different aeration properties and were used to grow Poinsettia and Impatiens ‘New Guinea’ in a greenhouse, resulting in differences in plant growth. The results show that air-filled porosity remained relatively unaffected by fragment size. Gas relative diffusivity differed significantly between treatments and was highest in the mix with the 2-4 mm particles and diminished rapidly as fragment size increased from 4 to 20 mm or decreased to 1-2 mm. Diffusivity was clearly lower in the bark/peat mixes but showed the same trend with coarse fragments. Root and shoot growth parameters were significantly and positively correlated to gas relative diffusivity. Moreover, the growth reduction observed in the bark/peat mixes relative to pure peat was most likely linked to limited gas exchange. Air-filled porosity assessments performed in situ (in the pot itself) or prior to potting, in cylinders, gave inconsistent results or were not significantly correlated to plant growth, indicating that aeration limitations are better diagnosed with gas diffusivity in growing media.Key words: Air-filled porosity, gas relative diffusivity, gas diffusion, peat substrates, bark, Euphorbia pulcherima, Impatiens (× novae-guinea)

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.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.726
Threshold uncertainty score0.619

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.213 · 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