Pore Occlusion by Sugars and Lipids as a Possible Mechanism of Aggregate Stability in Amended Soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Understanding the underlying mechanisms of structural stability and the contribution of specific organic fractions to such mechanisms is critical in designing new soil and water conservation strategies relying on organic amendments. The objective of this work was to study the role of neutral and uronic sugars and lipids in affecting key mechanisms (swelling rate, pressure evolution) involved in the stabilization of individual aggregates. A 48‐wk incubation study was performed on a clay loam and a silty clay loam amended with either deinking–secondary sludges, primary–secondary sludges, or composted deinking sludges at rates ranging from 8 to 24 Mg dry matter ha −1 Different structural stability indices were measured during the incubation, along with CO 2 evolved, neutral and uronic sugar, and lipid contents. Significant increases in all stability indices were measured for both soil types. These improvements were linked to a very intense phase of C mineralization and highly correlated with neutral and uronic sugars as well as lipid contents. Paper sludge amendments also resulted in significant decreases in maximum internal pressure of aggregates and aggregate swelling following immersion in water, two mechanisms affecting structural stability. Overall, the results suggest that reduction in maximum internal pressure induced by organic amendments probably resulted from increases in pore surface roughness and pore occlusion rather than an increase in surface wetting angles. This study also supports the view of a nonspecific action of the lipids and neutral and uronic sugars on aggregate stability to rapid wetting.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".