Forms and Lability of Phosphorus in Humic Acid Fractions of Hord Silt Loam Soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Phosphorus has long been known to be present in soil humic fractions, but little is known about specific P forms in humic fractions or their lability. We extracted the mobile humic acid (MHA) and recalcitrant calcium humate (CaHA) fractions from a Nebraska Hord silt loam soil (a fine-silty, mixed, superactive, mesic Cumulic Haplustoll) under continuous corn (Zea mays L.) receiving either inorganic fertilizer or animal manure. Solution 31P nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy demonstrated that P in both MHA and CaHA was predominantly present in organic forms, mostly as orthophosphate monoesters. Spiking experiments indicated no phytate present in these humic fractions, but scyllo-inositol P was identified in all samples. Potato phosphatase hydrolyzed some humic-bound P. Fungal phytase released more humic-bound P, which may come from scyllo-inositol P. No additional P was released by including nuclease. Ultraviolet (UV) irradiation increased soluble inorganic P in MHA fractions, but total hydrolyzable P in MHA fractions did not increase, suggesting that the portion of P that was UV labile was also enzymatically hydrolyzable. In contrast, UV irradiation increased soluble inorganic P and total hydrolyzable P in CaHA fractions, which suggests that UV-labile P in CaHA fractions did not overlap with enzymatically hydrolyzable P. Fertilization management did not significantly alter the lability of humic P in these humic fractions. This research has the potential to improve P management by increasing our knowledge of P lability for more efficient crop uptake.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".