MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013978971 · doi:10.4141/s00-025

Nitrous oxide production by manure samples collected from six manure-handling systems

2001· article· en· W2013978971 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Mario Tenuta, D. A. Barry, G. Fairchild, E. G. Beauchamp

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen Removal
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New BrunswickUniversity of GuelphAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDenitrifying bacteriaManureNitrous oxideDenitrificationManure managementNitriteChemistryNitrateAgronomyNitrogenEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stored manures are often considered to be source of nitrous oxide (N2O). A study was done to identify manure characteristics and handling stages related to N2O production. In two laboratory experiments we investigated the production of N2O from several animal manures collected at different stages of manure handling or locations in stored-manure systems. Denitrifying enzyme activity, denitrification and CO2 production rates and chemical and fibre characteristics of manure samples were also determined. Most samples had low rates of N2O production. Exceptions were open piles of fresh beef manure and the moist surface layer near the base of an open pile of poultry manure. Production of N2O was most highly correlated with nitrite plus nitrate (NO2− + NO3−) content of manure regardless of whether results were expressed on a wet or a dry weight basis. Denitrification was the most probable source of N2O because N2O production with acetylene and denitrifying enzyme activities was higher than N2O production without acetylene. Stored manure is potentially an important source of N2O emissions, particularly when storage conditions are conducive to formation of (NO2− + NO3−). Key words: Nitrous oxide production, denitrification, denitrifying enzyme activity, manure

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 score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations11
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Soil ScienceSame topicWastewater Treatment and Nitrogen RemovalFrench-language works237,207