MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2086363426 · doi:10.4141/s99-008

Residual effects of nitrogen fertiliser on the yield and N composition of succeeding cereal crops and on soil chemical properties of an Ethiopian highland Vertisol

2000· article· en· W2086363426 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Selamyihun Kidanu, D. G. Tanner, Tekalign Mamo

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant Micronutrient Interactions and Effects
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVertisolStrawAgronomyNitrogenDry matterGrowing seasonYield (engineering)Environmental scienceChemistryBiologySoil waterSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A trial was conducted on an Ethiopian Vertisol from 1990 to 1995 to determine the residual effects of fertiliser N applied to tef [Eragrostistef (Zucc.) Trotter] on the grain and straw yield, N content, and total N uptake of succeeding crops of durum wheat (Triticum turgidum var. durum) and tef. The mean agronomic efficiency of 60 kg fertiliser N ha −1 was 13.1 kg grain kg −1 fertiliser N applied in the current year and 5.4 kg grain kg −1 fertiliser N applied in the previous year. Thus, the residual fertiliser N benefit was equivalent to 41.2% of the response to current season N application for the two cereal crops. The mean rates of apparent recovery of fertiliser N were 65.8% for current season N application and 31.0% for previous season N application. Soil organic matter and nitrate levels increased linearly in response to both previous and current season N application rates. The current study demonstrates that the residual effect of fertiliser N enhanced the yields and N contents of the grain and straw of both wheat and tef, resulting in a significant increase in total N uptake. Any analysis of the profitability of fertiliser N response should reflect the multi-year benefit period. Key words: N recovery, N residue, N uptake, tef, wheat

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.069
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.191
Teacher spread0.176 · 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

Citations12
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Soil ScienceSame topicPlant Micronutrient Interactions and EffectsFrench-language works237,207