MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045566488 · doi:10.2134/jeq2006.0486

Effect of Liquid Municipal Biosolid Application Method on Tile and Ground Water Quality

2008· article· en· W2045566488 on OpenAlexafffund
David R. Lapen, Edward Topp, Michael G. Edwards, Lyne Sabourin, W. E. Curnoe, N. Gottschall, P. Bolton, Shaidur Rahman, B. Ball‐Coelho, Michael Payne, Sonya Kleywegt, Neil B. McLaughlin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Quality · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsUniversity of GuelphMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and ParksAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersMinistry of Education, IndiaMinistry of EnvironmentMinistry of Earth SciencesAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsTile drainageLoamGroundwaterEnvironmental scienceWater qualityTileKjeldahl methodHydrology (agriculture)NutrientBiosolidsIndicator bacteriaEnvironmental engineeringAnimal scienceFecal coliformChemistrySoil waterSoil scienceNitrogenGeologyEcologyBiologyMaterials scienceGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examined bacteria and nutrient quality in tile drainage and shallow ground water resulting from a fall land application of liquid municipal biosolids (LMB), at field application rates of 93,500 L ha(-1), to silt-clay loam agricultural field plots using two different land application approaches. The land application methods were a one-pass AerWay SSD approach (A), and surface spreading plus subsequent incorporation (SS). For both treatments, it took between 3 and 39 min for LMB to reach tile drains after land application. The A treatment significantly (p < 0.1) reduced application-induced LMB contamination of tile drains relative to the SS treatment, as shown by mass loads of total Kjeldahl N (TKN), NH(4)-N, Total P (TP), PO(4)-P, E. coli., and Clostridium perfringens. E. coli contamination resulting from application occurred to at least 2.0-m depth in ground water, but was more notable in ground water immediately beneath tile depth (1.2 m). Treatment ground water concentrations of selected nutrients and bacteria for the study period ( approximately 46 d) at 1.2-m depth were significantly higher in the treatment plots, relative to control plots. The TKN and TP ground water concentrations at 1.2-m depth were significantly (p < 0.1) higher for the SS treatment, relative to the A treatment, but there were no significant (p > 0.1) treatment differences for the bacteria. For the macroporous field conditions observed, pre-tillage by equipment such as the AerWay SSD, will reduce LMB-induced tile and shallow ground water contamination compared to surface spreading over non-tilled soil, followed by incorporation.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations67
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental QualitySame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207