Evaluation of Compost Leachates for Plant Growth in Hydroponic Culture
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Compost run-off leachates are usually rich in nutrients and can potentially be recycled in plant culture. Seedlings of tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill. ‘Roma VF’) and marigold (Tagetes erecta L. ‘Crackerjack’) were grown for five weeks in each of six hydroponic treatment solutions: full and half strength Hoagland's solution; leachates from spent mushroom compost (SMCL) and pond-collected runoff from a commercial composting operation (RCL); and these leachates amended with extra nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) (SMCL+NP and RCL+NP, respectively). The leachates were low in content of N and P, but rich in potassium (K), magnesium (Mg), calcium (Ca), sodium (Na), and various microelements. Top dry weight of tomato seedlings was highest in the two Hoagland's solutions, intermediate in RCL+NP, and lowest in the other solutions. With marigold, top dry weight in SMCL+NP was similar to that in the two Hoagland's solutions, intermediate in SMCL, and lowest in the RCL+NP and RCL solutions. The poor tomato performance on the SMCL+NP regime was the result of a high proportion of NH4-N ( < 50%), which over time lowered pH and caused nutritional disorders. Imbalance in tissue nutrient (low content of N and P and high content of K, Mg, Ca, and Na) from plants grown in the unamended SMCL and RCL solutions indicates a need to balance these nutrients in the leachates before it is recycled.
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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it