Effects of selected conditioners and tillage on the physical quality of a clay loam soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Field-crop yields are below their genetic and climatic potentials on many fine-textured soils due to low organic carbon content (OC), high bulk density (ρ b ), low hydraulic conductivity (K s ), insufficient air capacity (AC) and low plant-available water capacity (PAWC). Although soil conditioners derived from municipal, agricultural and industrial wastes are frequently used to improve soils, their effects on overall soil physical quality are still poorly understood. Hence, the objective of this laboratory soil core study was to determine for a Brookston clay loam the effectiveness of masonry sand, greenhouse rockwool waste, yard waste compost and swine manure compost for improving soil physical quality relative to “ideal” levels proposed in the literature, and relative to “benchmark” levels found in the soil under virgin conditions, long-term conventional tillage and long-term no-tillage. The virgin soil produced near-surface (0.05–0.15 m depth) values for ρ b (0.88 Mg m -3 ), AC (0.19 m 3 m -3 ) and PAWC (0.22 m 3 m -3 ) that fell within the optimal ranges proposed in the literature, while OC (68.2 g C kg -1 ) was slightly above optimal. The soil under long-term conventional tillage and no-tillage (cornsoybean rotation) produced below-optimal organic carbon content (21.9–22.5 g C kg -1 ), excessive ρ b (1.45–1.47 Mg m -3 ), insufficient AC (0.06 m 3 m -3 ) and low PAWC (0.14–0.19 m 3 m -3 ). Conventional tillage also produced below-optimal K s (10 −6 m s -1 ). Each conditioner could improve one or more of the above parameters, but not all five. Adding sand at 20–100 wt. % improved AC, but caused excessive reductions in OC and PAWC, and excessive increases in ρ b and K s . Greenhouse rockwool waste added at 2.5–10 wt. % improved AC and ρ b , but did not improve OC and PAWC. Yard waste compost added at 3.8–20 wt. % improved OC, ρ b and PAWC, but did not improve AC. Adding swine manure compost at 3.8–20 wt. % improved OC and ρ b , but did not improve AC or PAWC, and decreased K s . As no single conditioner could optimize all soil physical quality parameters, future studies using combinations of conditioners are proposed. Key words: Soil physical quality, tillage, soil conditioners, clay loam, sand, rockwool, compos
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".