Carbon Dioxide and Nitrous Oxide Content in Soils under Corn and Soybean
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Agricultural practices affect the production and emission of CO 2 and N 2 O from soil. The purpose of this 2‐yr field study was to determine the effects of tillage (conventionally tilled [CT] and no‐till [NT]) and fertilizer source (composted cattle manure and inorganic N–P–K fertilizer) on the CO 2 and N 2 O content in soil profiles under corn ( Zea mays L.) and soybean [ Glycine max (L.) Merr.]. The mean CO 2 and N 2 O gas contents (i.e., mass of gas per unit soil volume) in the soil profile were determined periodically during two field seasons by sampling the soil atmosphere using plastic tubes installed at three depths (10, 20, and 30 cm) within the crop row. The soil CO 2 content was greater in CT than NT soil and in manure‐amended than inorganically fertilized plots during 1 yr of the study. The soil N 2 O content was not affected by tillage practices or fertilizer sources. A significant autocorrelation between sampling dates in both years suggested that the CO 2 and N 2 O contents in the soil profile were not erratic or random, but temporally dependent on site‐specific factors. The peak CO 2 and N 2 O levels were measured within 50 d after seeding, probably because soil moisture conditions slowed diffusive gas flux but were favorable for microbial activity. Fluctuations in soil CO 2 and N 2 O contents were not related to the seasonal variation in soil temperature. At most sampling dates, there was a significant ( P < 0.05) positive correlation between the CO 2 and N 2 O content in the soil profile, suggesting similarity in the rate of gas accumulation and diffusive flux for CO 2 and N 2 O in soils. The CO 2 and N 2 O content in the soil profile appeared to be controlled more by soil moisture than soil temperature or agricultural practices.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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".