EFFECT OF SOIL AMENDMENT WITH ALFALFA POWDERS AND DISTILLERS GRAINS ON NUTRITION AND GROWTH OF CANOLA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two pot experiments were carried out under controlled environment conditions in the growth chamber to assess the potential use of alfalfa powders and distiller grains as organic fertilizers. Two types of dehydrated alfalfa powders (one with canola meal protein extraction by-product and one without) and two types of distiller grains (dried distillers grain with distillation solubles added and wet distillers grain without solubles) from wheat-based ethanol production were evaluated. Four different nitrogen (N)-based amendment application rates (0, 100, 200 and 400 kg N ha−1) were used along with urea applications made at the same N rates to a Brown Chernozem (Aridic Haploboroll) loamy textured soil collected from south-central Saskatchewan, Canada. Canola biomass yield, N, phosphorus (P), potassium (K), zinc (Zn), and cadmium (Cd) uptake were measured along with soil properties including pH, salinity, organic carbon, total nitrogen, phosphorus and extractable nutrients and cadmium before and after canola growth in each of the treatments. Application of alfalfa powder and distiller grain amendments resulted in significant canola biomass yield increases along with increased N, P, and K uptake compared to the unfertilized control. However, only a portion of the N added (∼30% to 50%) in the organic amendments was rendered available over the five week duration of the experiments. Amendments that had higher N content and lower carbon (C):N ratios such as dried distillers grain with solubles resulted in greater canola N uptake. Reduced germination and emergence of canola seedlings was observed at high rates of addition of distillers grain (400 kg N ha−1), the reason for which is unclear but may be due to a localized salt or toxicity effect of the amendment. The amendment with alfalfa powders and distiller grains resulted in small increases in residual soil nutrients. Effects on pH, salinity, organic carbon and extractable metals tended to be small and often not significant. Alfalfa powders and distillers grains appear to be quite effective in supplying nutrients, especially N, for plant growth over the short-term.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".