Estimating carbon retention in soils amended with composted beef cattle manure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Composted cattle manure is often used as a soil amendment to replenish nutrient pools and to supply a source of stable C. Compost composition affects the availability of nutrients and the stability of C following the addition of compost to soil. We investigated C mineralization in a loamy sand and a loam soil amended with nine composts, two fresh manures and alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) hay at a target rate of 10 mg total C g -1 soil. Soils were incubated at 25°C for 168 d. There was a significant interaction between amendment and soil type on C mineralization but generally, the effect of soil texture on amendment decomposition was small. The composts were very dissimilar in composition and resulted in substantial differences in the amount of C retained in the soils (2-39% C added evolved as CO 2 ). Total C evolved during the incubation period could be predicted from the NH 4 -N content and the NH 4 -N/NO 3 -N ratio of the composted manures (R 2 = 0.91–0.93). Estimation of the C retained in soils amended with compost as a function of simple chemical properties of the compost provides an important tool for evaluating the effectiveness of compost as a soil amendment, helping to calculate net retention of C. Key words: Compost, mineralization, soil carbon, amendment
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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".