Nutrient cycling in a poplar plantation (<i>Populus trichocarpa × Populus deltoides</i>'Beaupré') on former agricultural land in northern Belgium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hydrological fluxes, atmospheric deposition, litterfall, and soil percolation of the most important nutrients were measured in an 18-year-old poplar plantation on a well-drained silt loam soil during 2 consecutive years. Downward soil water flux and transpiration are the most important factors in the water balance. Around 80% of total nitrogen input (6.6 and 6.5 kmol·ha –1 in years 1 and 2, respectively) originates from litterfall. After nitrification only a negligible amount of nitrate leaches during the growing season. Yearly uptake of nitrogen by the poplar ecosystem (woody biomass, leaves, and ground vegetation) approximately equals the input, of which more than 50% is accounted for by the leaves. This indicates very efficient nitrogen cycling. Total deposition of base cations originates from two processes, dry deposition (Mg 2+ and Ca 2+ ) and canopy leaching (K + and Ca 2+ ). Litter input of Ca 2+ represents about 83% of the total input (stand deposition + litterfall), Mg 2+ about 61%, and K + less then 50%. Percolation of base cations at 1 m depth is very limited. Rather high Ca 2+ and K + contents of the woody biomass can lead to high exports at harvest. Nutrient cycling in the poplar stand proved to be very efficient, with no significant nutrient losses.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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".