Crop Performance and Soil Properties in Two Artificially Eroded Soils in North‐Central Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Field experiments were conducted from 1991 to 1995 at Josephburg (Orthic Black Chernozem, Typic Cryoboroll) and Cooking Lake (Orthic Gray Luvisol, Typic Cryoboralf), Alberta, to determine the impact of topsoil removal on selected soil properties, N‐mineralization potential, and crop yield, and the effectiveness of various amendments for restoring the productivity of eroded soils. The simulated‐erosion levels were established in the autumn of 1990 by removing 20 cm of topsoil in 5‐cm depth increments. The four amendments were: control, addition of 5 cm of topsoil, fertilizers to supply 100 kg N ha −1 and 20 kg P ha −1 , and cattle manure at 75 Mg ha −1 . Topsoil and manure were applied once in the autumn of 1990, while fertilizers were applied annually from 1991 to 1995. Available N and P; total C, N, and P; and N‐mineralization potential decreased, while bulk density increased with increasing depth of topsoil removal. Tiller number, plant height, spike density, thousand‐kernel weight, and leaf area index decreased with simulated erosion. Grain yield reductions due to simulated soil erosion were either linear or curvilinear functions of nutrient removal. Application of N and P fertilizers and manure improved grain yield and reduced the impact of yield loss due to erosion. Return of 5 cm of topsoil also increased grain yield, but to a lesser extent than manure or fertilizers. Grain yields were maximized when fertilizers were also applied to organic amendment treatments. Our findings suggest the importance of integrated use of organic amendments and chemical fertilizers for best crop yields on severely eroded soils.
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".