Bibliographic record
Abstract
Leaching of fertilizer N in sandy soils is both an agricultural and environmental concern and depends, in part, on the N holding capacity of the soils in the vadose zone. We examined NH 4 adsorption and desorption in surface (0–30 cm) and subsurface (30–60 cm) samples of Wabasso (sandy, siliceous, hyperthermic Alfic Alaquod) and Candler (uncoated hyperthermic, Typic Quartzipsamment) sands using a batch technique. Samples of a 90‐ to 100‐cm depth horizon of the Wabasso sand were also used in the study. The NH 4 quantity–intensity (Q/I) relations showed that the potential buffering capacity (PBC) of the soils ranged from 0.26 (Wabasso, 30–60 cm depth) to 3.9 (Wabasso, 90–100 cm depth) cmol c kg −1 M −1/2 Labile NH 4 , as determined from the Q/I, was 4.9 × 10 −3 (Candler, subsurface) to 13.8 × 10 −3 (Wabasso, surface) cmol c kg −1 Positive linear relationships were observed between organic C content and Q/I plot parameters (potential NH 4 buffering capacity and labile NH 4 ) of all soil samples except in the Wabasso 90‐ to 100‐cm depth horizon. Although NH 4 adsorption capacity of the surface soils was greater than that of the subsurface soils, desorption was greater from the former soils than that from the latter. This study clearly demonstrated that the potential NH 4 buffering capacity and labile NH 4 for the sandy soils studied were much lower than those for clay and silt loam soils.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".