Phosphorus Sequestration by Chemical Amendments to Reduce Leaching from Wastewater Applications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phosphorus-immobilizing amendments can be useful in minimizing P leaching from high P soils that may be irrigated with wastewater. This study tested the P-binding ability of various amendment materials in a laboratory incubation experiment and then tested the best amendment in a field setup using drainage lysimeters. The laboratory experiment involved incubating 100-g samples of soil (72 mg kg(-1) water-extractable phosphorus, WEP) with various amendments at different rates for 63 d at field moisture capacity and 25 degrees C. The amendments tested were alum [Al2SO4)3.14H2O], ferric chloride (FeCl3), calcium carbonate (CaCO3), water treatment residual (WTR), and sugarbeet lime (SBL). Ferric chloride and alum at rates of 1.5 and 3.9 g kg(-1), respectively, were the most effective amendments that decreased WEP to 20 mg kg(-1), below which leaching has previously been shown to be low. Alum (1.3 kg m(-2)), which is less sensitive to redox conditions, was subsequently tested under field conditions, where it reduced WEP concentration in the 0- to 0.15-m layer from 119 mg kg(-1) on Day 0 to 36.1 mg kg(-1) (85% decrease) on Day 41. Lysimeter breakthrough tests using tertiary-treated potato-processing wastewater (mean total phosphorus [TP] = 3.4 mg L(-1)) showed that alum application reduced leachate TP and soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP) concentrations by 27 and 25%, respectively. These results indicate that alum application may be an effective strategy to immobilize P in high P coarse-textured soils. The relatively smaller decreases in TP and SRP in the leachate compared to WEP suggest some of the P may be coming from depths below 0.2 m. Thus, to achieve higher P sequestration, deeper incorporation of the alum may be necessary.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".