MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2091104315 · doi:10.2134/jeq2001.301229x

Phosphorus Accumulation in Cultivated Soils from Long‐Term Annual Applications of Cattle Feedlot Manure

2001· article· en· W2091104315 on OpenAlexaffabout
Joann K. Whalen, Chi Chang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Quality · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsManureAgronomyEnvironmental scienceSoil waterHordeum vulgareFeedlotStrawLeaching (pedology)AmendmentNutrientAnimal sciencePoaceaeBiologySoil scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historically, manure has been recognized as an excellent soil amendment that can improve soil quality and provide nutrients for crop production. In areas of high animal density, however, the potential for water pollution resulting from improper storage or disposal of manure may be significant. The objective of this study was to determine the P balance of cultivated soils under barley (Hordeum vulgare L.) production that have received long-term annual manure amendments. Nonirrigated soils at the study site in Lethbridge, AB, Canada, have received 0, 30, 60, or 90 Mg manure ha(-1) (wet wt. basis) while irrigated plots received 0, 60, 120, and 180 Mg ha(-1) annually for 16 yr. The amount of P removed in barley grain and straw during the 16-yr period was between 5 and 18% of the cumulative manure P applied. There was a balance between P applied in manure and P recovered in crops and soils (to the 150-cm depth) of nonirrigated plots during the 16-yr study. In irrigated plots, as much as 1.4 Mg P ha(-1) added (180 Mg ha(-1) yr(-1) treatment) was not recovered over 16 yr, and was probably lost through leaching. The risk of ground water contamination with P from manure was greater in irrigated than nonirrigated plots that have received long-term annual manure amendments. Manure application rates should be reduced in nonirrigated and irrigated plots to more closely match manure P inputs to crop P requirements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations202
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental QualitySame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207