MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027712586 · doi:10.4141/s01-027

Boron fractionation in some Saskatchewan soils

2002· article· en· W2027712586 on OpenAlex
Muhammad Ali Raza, A. R. Mermut, J.J. Schoenau, S. S. Malhi

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Micronutrient Interactions and Effects
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFractionationChemistrySoil waterExtraction (chemistry)AdsorptionIon exchangeCation-exchange capacityTotal organic carbonBoronEnvironmental chemistryChromatographySoil scienceIonGeologyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Knowledge of B fractions is essential for understanding its chemistry and potential contribution to plant uptake. Four different extraction methodologies to determine readily available B were compared, using a four-step sequential B fractionation procedure, to reveal the nature of soil B in nine selected soils from the Brown and Gray Luvisol zones with different textures and management histories. The four soil extraction techniques were: hot water (HW), 0.01M CaCl 2 , 1 M NH 4 -acetate and anion exchange membranes (AEM). The other four fractions, specifically adsorbed, oxide bound, organically bound, and residual B were determined sequentially on the same soil samples. On average, HW extracted more B than 0.01M CaCl 2 , 1 M NH 4 -acetate, and AEM. In almost every soil, readily soluble B represented only a small proportion of the total B content, regardless of the extraction method used. Most soil B existed in the residual or occluded form, which accounted for between 92 and 99%, with an average of 97%, of the total soil B. The concentration of organically bound B was higher than that of oxide bound B and specifically adsorbed B, irrespective of the readily soluble B extracting solution used. Cation exchange capacity (CEC) appeared to be an important characteristic to predict the B pools. No significant correlation was found between soil organic carbon content and the different B pools, except for hot water soluble (HWS) B. Correlation coefficients between the B pools and particle size distribution were poor and correlation between carbonates and B pools were insignificant. The findings suggest that in Saskatchewan soils, readily soluble B is only a small proportion of the total B, and the majority of B exists as residual or occluded form. Hot water soluble B appears to be a good method to estimate available B. We found this method rather simple, efficient, and consistent. Key words: Boron fractionation, exchangeable B, extractable B, organically bound B, soluble B

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.797
Threshold uncertainty score0.986

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.183 · 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