Symbiotic Dinitrogen Fixation in Forage Legumes Amended with High Rates of De‐Inking Paper Sludge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper de‐inking process produces a waste by‐product, de‐inking paper sludge (DPS), which contains paper fibers, clay particles, and inks and has high C and Ca and low N and P concentrations. Use of high rates of DPS to increase the soil organic matter thus requires provision of high rates of N for adequate plant growth. Using dinitrogen (N2)‐fixing forage legumes is an alternative to the N fertilization under such circumstances. In a 2‐yr field study (1995 and 1996), the effect of different rates of DPS (0, 50, or 100 Mg dry matter ha−1), applied once in October 1994, were evaluated on symbiotic N2 fixation of forage legumes established on two soil types in Eastern Quebec, Canada. Symbiotic N2 fixation was measured in alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.), birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.), red clover (Trifolium pratense L.), and sweetclover (Melilotus officinalis L.); bromegrass (Bromus inermis L.) was used as the reference (non N2–fixing) crop. Dinitrogen fixation was estimated by the 15N natural abundance method. The percentages of N derived from the atmosphere increased significantly with DPS in the year of establishment (1995). In the first production year (1996), the effects of DPS on N2 fixation were mainly observed at the first cut. Our results show that DPS used as an organic amendment generally led to similar or greater forage legume productivity and greater N2 fixation compared with unamended controls in the first production year and is compatible with sustainable agricultural practices.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".