Use of bark and combined paper sludge for the revegetation of bark-covered land
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the use of bark and combined paper sludge to develop a suitable plant growth substrate and to establish a vegetation cover on bark-covered land. Field experiments were established to determine the best plant growth medium, plant mixtures, and fertilization program. The best soil cover consisted of 2.5 cm of combined paper sludge on top of 2.5 cm of black bark. On this soil cover, the Savoureux mixture in combination with birdsfoot trefoil (Lotus corniculatus L.), Lab02 in mixture with MR77, and birdsfoot trefoil in mixture with bromegrass (Bromus inermis L.) gave good vegetation growth and yields. For birdsfoot trefoil over all soil covers, the phosphorus and potassium fertilizations were required at 140 kg P2O5/ha and 160 kg K2O/ha, respectively. These results suggest that combined paper sludge and black bark can be used as topsoil to favor plant establishment on bark-covered land. Key words: topsoil, paper sludge, bark, birdsfoot trefoil, bromegrass, fertilization, NO3–-N, phosphorus.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".