MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2036121744 · doi:10.2136/sssaj2005.0122

Nitrogen Recovery and Partitioning with Different Rates and Methods of Sidedressed Manure

2006· article· en· W2036121744 on OpenAlexaff
B. R. Ball Coelho, R. C. Roy, A. J. Bruin

Bibliographic record

VenueSoil Science Society of America Journal · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsManureTopsoilEnvironmental scienceAgronomyDrainageFertilizerNitrogenCropAnimal scienceChemistrySoil waterBiologySoil scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Animal manure is an important source of N for crops in areas with intensive livestock production. Variable manure N availability can incite over‐application of manure or supplemental fertilizer leading to low N recovery and possible negative environmental and economic impacts. To improve manure N use efficiency, the effects of rate and method of sidedress application of liquid swine ( Sus scrofa ) manure (LSM) on N recovery by corn ( Zea mays L.) were determined. We used in‐row injection (INJ) or topdressing (TD) to sidedress LSM from 1999 to 2002 at rates ranging from 0 to 93.5 m 3 ha −1 , and measured grain N uptake and NO 3 –N in drainage tile water, stalks, and topsoil postharvest. Apparent recovery of manure total N (LSM‐N) ranged from 0 to 57% and was greatest with injection of 37.4 m 3 ha −1 (194 kg LSM‐N ha −1 ). Injection rate to achieve 95% of maximum grain yield averaged 216 kg LSM‐N ha −1 over 4 yr. Transport of LSM‐N to ground‐ and surface waters was minimized when sidedressed at or below rates for optimal yield. When injected N exceeded crop demand, NO 3 –N increased to over 10 mg kg −1 in topsoil, 20 mg L −1 in drainage water, and to excessive (3.6 g kg −1 ) levels in stalks. Due to greater LSM‐N recovery, injection (59%) is recommended rather than topdress (41%) for sidedress application of manure.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations38
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSoil Science Society of America JournalSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207