MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114567724 · doi:10.1081/css-120003070

Measurement of phosphorus desorption from a spodic horizon using two different desorption methods and pH control

2002· article· en· W2114567724 on OpenAlexaff
Jagtar S. Bhatti, N. B. Comerford

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications in Soil Science and Plant Analysis · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDesorptionPodzolDilutionChemistryPhosphorusSubsoilExtraction (chemistry)Environmental chemistryChromatographySoil waterSoil scienceEnvironmental scienceAdsorption

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phosphorus (P) desorption is a key process in understanding the P dynamics in the subsoil of poorly drained Spodosols of the lower coastal plain of the United States. Phosphorus desorption is the major mechanism which defines the labile pool of spodic horizon inorganic P. The objective of this study was to compare methods for determining P desorption isotherms. A sequential extraction method was compared to a dilution method, and the need for pH control within each method was evaluated. Results showed that the sequential extraction method released more P than the dilution method and that pH control during either method did not significantly alter the results. The estimated partition coefficients (Kd) from the sequential method were significantly lower than the dilution method, especially at the lower solution P concentrations. At these low soil solution P concentrations, the variability in estimated Kd values would have a significant influence on the uptake predicted by mechanistic computer 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.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.243 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations11
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications in Soil Science and Plant AnalysisSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207