Effect of Soil Tillage and Fertilization on Soil Nutrient and Respiration Flux in Spring Maize Fields
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper the effects of two types of tillage (conventional tillage-CT and zero tillage-ZT) with three different soil fertilization patterns(chemical fertilizer, chemical-organic fertilizer and organic fertilizer) on soil rapidly available nitrogen, rapidly available phosphorus, rapidly available kalium and soil respiration flux in ridge cultivation maize fields were studied. The results indicate that in 2005 and 2006, soil rapidly available nitrogen of two tillage type in different fertilization treatments were organic fertilizer (OF) > chemical-organic fertilizer (OCF) > no fertilizer (CK) > chemical fertilizer(CF); Except For OF, the decreasing of soil available nitrogen contents of each fertilization treatments for ZT were more than those of CT. Rapidly available phosphorus for ZT were OCF >OF > CF >CK, and for CT were OCF > CK >OF> CF; rapidly available kalium for ZT were OCF >OF > CK > CF. soil respiration for different of fertilization patterns for ZT were OCF >OF > CK > CF. In ZT, soil available N and P had close relation with soil respiration flux, especially in OCF treatment. While in CT, soil available N had close relation with soil respiration flux.
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) | 0.000 | 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".