Gypsum-saturated water to reclaim alluvial saline sodic and sodic soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Inadequate management of soil and irrigation water contribute to soil degradation, particularly in the alluvial areas of Northeast Brazil, where salinity and sodicity are already common features. This study evaluates the effects of the addition of gypsum in the irrigation water on physical and chemical properties of soils with different levels of salinity and sodicity. Samples were collected at the Custódia irrigation area of Brazil, predominantly covered by alluvial soils. Leaching tests using simulated irrigation water classified as C3S1, and gypsum-saturated irrigation water were carried out in soil columns of 20 and 50 cm depth. Soil leaching with gypsum saturated water (T2) resulted in an increase in the amounts of exchangeable calcium and potassium, and in a decrease of soil pH, in relation to the original soil (T0), with significant statistical differences to the treatment using only water (T1). There was a reduction in the electrical conductivity, exchangeable sodium and exchangeable sodium percentage in both treatments (T1 and T2), with treatment T2 being more effective in the leaching of soil sodium. No changes of electrical conductivity, calcium and pH in depth were observed, but the 20 - 50 cm layer presented higher amounts of magnesium, sodium and exchangeable sodium percentage. Gypsum saturated water improved the hydraulic conductivity in both layers. The use of gypsum in the irrigation water improved soil physical and chemical properties and should be considered as an alternative in the process of reclamation of saline-sodic and sodic soils in Northeast Brazil.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".