MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039148883 · doi:10.2134/agronj2005.0349

Carbon Storage in Soils of the North American Great Plains: Effect of Cropping Frequency

2005· article· en· W2039148883 on OpenAlexaffabout
C. A. Campbell, H. H. Janzen, Keith Paustian, E. G. Gregorich, Lucretia A. Sherrod, Biqing Liang, R.P. Zentner

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgronomyCroppingCropping systemEnvironmental scienceSoil carbonTillageSoil waterCropBiologyAgricultureSoil scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summer fallow (fallow) is still widely used on the North American Great Plains to replenish soil moisture between crops. Our objective was to examine how fallowing affects soil organic carbon (SOC) in various agronomic and climate settings by reviewing long‐term studies in the midwestern USA (five sites) and the Canadian prairies (17 sites). In most soils, SOC increased with cropping frequency though not usually in a linear fashion. In the Canadian studies, SOC response to tillage and cropping frequency varied with climate—in semiarid conditions, SOC gains under no‐till were about 250 kg ha−1 yr−1 greater than for tilled systems regardless of cropping frequency; in subhumid environments, the advantage was about 50 kg ha−1 yr−1 for rotations with fallow but 250 kg ha−1 yr−1 with continuous cropping. Specific crops also influenced SOC: Replacing wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) with lentil (Lens culinaris Medikus) had little effect; replacing wheat with lower‐yielding flax (Linum usitatismum L.) reduced SOC gains; and replacing wheat with erosion‐preventing fall rye (Secale cereale L.) increased SOC gains. In unfertilized systems, cropping frequency did not affect SOC gains, but in fertilized systems, SOC gains often increased with cropping frequency. In a Colorado study (three sites each with three slope positions), SOC gains increased with cropping frequency, but the response tended to be highest at the lowest potential evaporation site (where residue C inputs were greatest) and least in the toeslope positions (despite their high residue C inputs). The Century and the Campbell et al. SOC models satisfactorily simulated the relative responses of SOC although they underestimated gains by about one‐third.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.279
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations117
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgronomy JournalSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207