MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054535525 · doi:10.5539/jas.v7n1p192

Biochar from Empty Fruit Bunches, Wood, and Rice Husks: Effects on Soil Physical Properties and Growth of Sweet Corn on Acidic Soil

2014· article· en· W2054535525 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Huda Abdulrazzaq, Hamdan Jol, Ahmed Husni, Rosenani Abu-Bakr

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiocharAmendmentHuskSlash-and-charSoil fertilityPyrolysisAgronomyRaw materialEnvironmental scienceSoil conditionerSoil pHChemistrySoil waterSoil scienceBiologyBotany

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Intentional amendment of soil with biochar is offering a new strategy for enhancing soil physical properties and soil fertility. Nonetheless, the characteristics of biochars vary with their different conditions and pyrolysis techniques. The objective of the present study was to improve the understanding of how adding biochar applications and the pyrolysis of native feedstock to acidic soil can be utilized to amend soil physical properties and soil fertility in Malaysia. Three kinds of primary biochar were used, empty fruit bunch (EFB) and wood biochar (WB) were produced from slow pyrolysis, and rice husk biochar (RHB) was prepared by gasification. The biochars were characterized by Brunauer-Emmett-Teller surface area analysis and scanning electron microscopy and applied at 15 and 30 t/ha to acidic soil. Results indicated that the total surface area of the RHB was approximately double of that of EFB and five times greater than that of WB. The application of RHB at 30 t/ha significantly increased the drained upper limit, permanent wilting point, hydraulic conductivity, and total porosity; however, this increase did not result in increased sweet corn growth, while EFB applied at rates 30 t/ ha resulted in a highly positive effect on sweet corn growth, suggesting that EFB has important potential benefits for agriculture, in conclusion, the selection of biochar as a soil amendment must be based on the intention of the amendment. If to enhance soil physical charactertics are an aim, then RHB is the most suitable option. If the objective of soil biochar amendment is to increase soil fertility, then EFB will be suitable choice.

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)0.000
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.649
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.184 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations16
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207