Cropping system influences on soil chemical properties and soil quality in the Great Plains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Soil management and cropping systems have long-term effects on agronomic and environmental functions. This study examined the influence of contrasting management practices on selected soil chemical properties in eight long-term cropping system studies throughout the Great Plains and the western Corn Belt. For each study, soil organic C (SOC), total N (TN), particulate organic matter (POM), inorganic N, electrical conductivity (EC), and soil pH were evaluated at 0–7.5, 7.5–15, and 15–30 cm within conventional (CON) and alternative (ALT) cropping systems for 4 years (1999–2002). Treatment effects were primarily limited to the surface 7.5 cm of soil. No-tillage (NT) and/or elimination of fallow in ALT cropping systems resulted in significantly (P<0.05) greater SOC and TN at 0–7.5 cm within five of the eight study sites [Akron, Colorado (CO); Bushland, Texas (TX); Fargo, North Dakota (ND); Mandan, ND; and Swift Current, Saskatchewan (SK), Canada]. The same pattern was observed with POM, where POM was significantly (P<0.05) greater at four of the eight study sites [Bushland, TX, Mandan, ND, Sidney, Montana (MT), and Swift Current, SK]. No consistent pattern was observed with soil EC and pH due to management, although soil EC explained almost 60% of the variability in soil NO3-N at 0–7.5 cm across all locations and sampling times. In general, chemical soil properties measured in this study consistently exhibited values more conducive to crop production and environmental quality in ALT cropping systems relative to CON cropping systems.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".