MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058922850 · doi:10.1300/j064v19n03_06

Fertilizer N and P Effects on Root Mass of Bromegrass, Alfalfa and Barley

2002· article· en· W2058922850 on OpenAlexaffabout
S. S. Malhi, K. S. Gill

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Agriculture · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBromus inermisMedicago sativaAgronomyHordeum vulgareFertilizerBiologyPoaceae

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Roots play a major role in maintaining organic matter in soil. Six field experiments were conducted to evaluate the effects of fertilizer N and P rates, application times and placement methods on root mass of meadow bromegrass (Bromus biebersteinii Roam and Shultz), smooth bromegrass (Bromus inermis Leyss), alfalfa (Medicago sativa Leyss) and barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) in the surface 15 cm of Black Chernozemic (Udic Boroll) and Gray Luvisolic (Boralf) soils in central Alberta, Canada. Root mass of grasses and barley was markedly increased with N and P fertilization and increase in root mass was greater with band placement than broadcast N. Black Chernozemic soils produced more root mass than Gray Luvisolic soils. Root mass of bromegrass and alfalfa was many times greater than that of barley. Root mass was greater for alfalfa than smooth bromegrass, and for bromegrass-alfalfa mixture than their pure stands. In conclusion, use of N and P fertilizers and growing of bromegrass, alfalfa and bromegrass grass-alfalfa mixture could be employed to increase root mass and possibly increase C storage in soil.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.208

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 studies0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Citations42
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable AgricultureSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207