MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2011255103 · doi:10.2134/jeq2007.0083

Gaseous Nitrogen Emissions and Forage Nitrogen Uptake on Soils Fertilized with Raw and Treated Swine Manure

2007· article· en· W2011255103 on OpenAlexaff
Martin H. Chantigny, Denis A. Angers, Philippe Rochette, Gilles Bélanger, Daniel I. Massé, Denis Côté

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Quality · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsInstitut de Recherche et de Développement en AgroenvironnementAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoamFertilizerForageManureRaw materialAgronomyChemistryNitrogenPhleumAnimal scienceAnaerobic digestionDigestateSoil waterEnvironmental scienceMethaneBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Treatments to reduce solids content in liquid manure have been developed, but little information is available on gaseous N emissions and plant N uptake after application of treated liquid swine manure (LSM). We measured crop yield, N uptake, and NH3 and N2O losses after the application of mineral fertilizer (NH4 NO3), raw LSM, and LSM that was decanted, filtered, anaerobically digested, or chemically flocculated. The experiment was conducted from 2001 to 2003 on a loam and a sandy loam cropped to timothy (Phleum pratense L.) with annual applications equivalent to 80 kg N ha(-1) in spring and 60 kg N ha(-1) after the first harvest. Raw LSM resulted in NH3 emissions three to six times larger (P < 0.05) than mineral fertilizer. The LSM treatments reduced NH3 emissions by an average of 25% compared with raw LSM (P < 0.05). The N2O emissions tended to be higher with raw LSM than with mineral fertilizer. The LSM treatments had little effect on N2O emissions, except for anaerobic digestion, which reduced emissions by >50% compared with raw LSM (P < 0.05). Forage yield with raw LSM was >90% of that with mineral fertilizer. The LSM treatments tended to increase forage yield and N uptake relative to raw LSM. We conclude that treated or untreated LSM offers an alternative to mineral fertilizers for forage grass production but care must be taken to minimize NH3 volatilization. Removing solids from LSM by mechanical, chemical, and biological means reduced NH3 losses from LSM applied to perennial grass.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations159
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental QualitySame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207