Nitrogen availability from peat amendments used in boreal oil sands reclamation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following surface mining, peat is typically used as an organic amendment to cap reconstructed soils in the Athabasca oil sands region of Alberta. Yet, very little is known about its ability to provide available nitrogen (N) in these soils. Hence, the overall objective of this study was to measure soil nitrogen (N) availability throughout the year in five peat amendments. Specific objectives were: (1) to examine seasonal variability in soil labile N pool sizes (nitrate, ammonium, dissolved organic N, and microbial biomass N), and (2) to determine in situ net nitrification, ammonification, and mineralization rates using the resin-core technique. Results from this field incubation method indicated a strong seasonal variability in net mineralization rates, with maximum positive values in the fall, and low or negative rates in winter. Net ammonification rates, which were significantly correlated to soil moisture content, were significantly smaller and showed smaller seasonal fluctuations and fewer differences among peat materials than net nitrification rates. Furthermore, the contribution of net nitrification to total net mineralization rates was characteristically higher than what is typically observed in undisturbed boreal forest soils. Taken together, results indicate that net nitrification processes may control nitrogen availability in these reclaimed soils.Key words: Soil nitrogen, soil reclamation, nitrification, mineralization, boreal 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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".