MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2094918742 · doi:10.4236/as.2011.23031

Cropping frequency and N fertilizer effects on soil water distribution from spring to fall in the semiarid Canadian prairies

2011· article· en· W2094918742 on OpenAlex
R. De Jong, C. A. Campbell, R.P. Zentner, Prakash Basnyat, Brian Grant, R. L. Desjardins

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural Sciences · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoil and Unsaturated Flow
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChernozemAgronomyEnvironmental scienceSummer fallowFertilizerSoil waterEvapotranspirationWater-use efficiencyCrop rotationWater contentPrecipitationCropIrrigationCroppingBiologySoil scienceGeographyAgricultureEcologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the semiarid Canadian prairies, water is the most limiting and nitrogen (N) the second most limiting factor influencing spring wheat (Triticum aestivum L.) production. The efficiency of water-and nitrogen use needs to be assessed in order to maintain this production system. The effects of cropping frequency and N fertilization on trends in soil water distribution and water use were quantified for an 18-yr (1967-1984) field experiment conducted on a medium textured Orthic Brown Chernozem (Aridic Haploboroll) in southwestern Saskatchewan, Canada. Soil water contents were measured eight times each year and plant samples were taken at five phenological growth stages. The treatments studied were continuous wheat (Cont W), summer fallow - wheat, F-(W) and summer fallow - wheat - wheat, F-W-(W) each receiving recommended rates of N and phosphorus (P) fertilizer, and (F)-W-W and (Cont W) each receiving only P fertilizer, with the examined rotation phase shown in parentheses. Soil water conserved under fallow during the summer months averaged 25 mm in the root zone, and was related to the initial water content of the soil, the amount of precipitation received, its distribution over time, and potential evapotranspiration. Under a wheat crop grown on fallow, soil water contents between spring and the five-leaf stage remained relatively constant at about 250 mm, but those under a stubble crop, with 40 mm lower spring soil water reserves, increased slightly until about the three-leaf stage. During the period of expansive crop growth (from the five-leaf to the soft dough stage) soil water was rapidly lost from all cropped phases at rates of 1.87 mm.day–1 for F-(W) (N+P), 1.23 mm.day–1 for Cont W (N+P) and 1.17 mm.day–1 for Cont W (+P). The initial loss was from the 0 - 0.3 m depth, but during the latter half of the growing season from deeper depths, although rarely from the 0.9 - 1.2 m depth. In very dry years (e.g., 1973, with 87 mm precipitation between spring and fall) summer fallow treatments lost water. In wet years with poor precipitation distribution (e.g., 1970, with 287 mm precipitation between spring and fall but 142 mm of this in one week between the three- and five-leaf stage) even cropped treatments showed evidence of leaching. The above-ground biomass water use efficiency for Cont W was 19.2 and 16.7 kg.ha–1.mm–1, respectively, for crops receiving (N+P) and P fertilizer only. Grain yield water use efficiency (8.91 kg.ha–1.mm–1) was not significantly influenced by cropping frequency nor N fertilizer. The 18 years of detailed measurements of plant and soil parameters under various crop management systems provide an invaluable source of information for developing and testing simulation models.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.558
Threshold uncertainty score0.798

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 communication0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.166 · 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