Growth of winter wheat irrigated with diluted kraft pulp mill effluent on soils amended with gypsum and wood ash
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Supplementing irrigation water with effluents could reduce the need for potable water for irrigation and promote nutrient recycling, but may require additional amendments to deal with Na. In a growth chamber experiment, winter wheat was seeded into a control soil and to soil amended with either gypsum or wood ash applied at an equivalent rate of 15 dry t ha -1 . Wheat was irrigated at a rate of 6 mm d -1 with distilled water (DW), kraft pulp mill effluent (KPME) and waste-activated sludge (WAS), and three KPME/WAS combinations. This included two KPME/WAS combinations diluted with DW to 25 and 50% (KPME/WAS:DW) to evaluate the effect on the nutrient uptake and biomass and the impact on soluble ions in the soil. Effluent applications increased wheat biomass up to 70%, and increases of 97 and 140% were observed in soils amended with gypsum and ash, respectively. Effluent applications increased soluble Na, Ca, and SO 4 , but only on the gypsum-amended soils, except those irrigated with WAS, had lower sodium adsorption ratio (SAR) than control soils by 0.7 to 3 units. Effluent combinations at the lower dilutions in combination with gypsum could be used to provide supplemental water with moderate increases in electrical conductivity (ECe) and SAR that would still be within tolerable limits of many crops.Key words: Effluent irrigation, electrical conductivity, gypsum, sodium adsorption ratio, wood ash
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".