Flush of Carbon Dioxide Following Rewetting of Dried Soil Relates to Active Organic Pools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil quality assessment could become more standardized with the development of a simple, rapid, and reliable method for quantifying potential soil biological activity. We evaluated the flush of CO 2 following rewetting of dried soil under standard laboratory conditions as a method to estimate an active organic matter fraction. The flush of CO 2 following rewetting of dried soil (3 d incubation at ≈50% water‐filled pore space and 25°C) was assessed for 20 soil series containing a wide range of organic C (20 ± 13 g kg −1 ) from Alberta–British Columbia, Maine, Texas, and Georgia. This flush of CO 2 explained 97% of the variability in cumulative C mineralization during , 86% of the variability in soil microbial biomass , and 67% of the variability in net N mineralization during Accounting for geographical differences in mean annual temperature and precipitation, which could affect soil organic matter quality, further improved relationships between the flush of CO 2 and active, passive, and total C and N pools. Measuring the flush of CO 2 following rewetting of dried soil may have value for routine soil testing of biological soil quality because it (i) is an incubation procedure patterned after natural occurrences in most soils, (ii) exhibits strong overall relationships with active organic pools, (iii) shows relatively minor changes in relationships with active organic pools that may be due to climatic variables, (iv) has a simple setup with minimal equipment requirements, and (v) has rapid analysis time.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".