MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Nutrient uptake by grape in a Brazilian soil affected by rock biofertilizer

2011· article· en· W2141779167 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of soil science and plant nutrition · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicArsenic contamination and mitigation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersBanco do Nordeste do BrasilFundação de Amparo à Ciência e Tecnologia do Estado de PernambucoConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsBiofertilizerFertilizerPotashInoculationPhosphoriteEarthwormHorticultureNutrientChemistrySulfurAgronomyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PK rock biofertilizers made from rocks and elemental sulphur inoculated with Acidithiobacillus improve yield of many short cycle plants similarly to soluble fertilizers.This study aims to evaluate the potential of PK rock biofertilizers for grape cultivation in the Brazilian San Francisco Valley.Three sources of P and K were compared: (a) soluble fertilizers, (b) biofertilizers plus elemental sulphur inoculated with Acidithiobacillus, and (c) ground phosphate and potash rocks, all at three application rates.A control treatment without P and K fertilization was added.Earthworm compound was applied as N source in all treatments.Grape (Vitis vinifera cv.Italia Pirovano) was cultivated in a dystrophic Planossol (medium texture) at the San Francisco River in the Brazilian Semiarid.P, K, Ca, Mg, S-SO 4 2-and Fe concentrations were analyzed in grape leaves and fruits.The results showed adequate leaf contents of S-SO 4 2-, K, and Fe with PK biofertilizer application plus earthworm compound, which indicates this may be alternative to soluble fertilizer for grape in soils with low available P and K.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.621
Threshold uncertainty score0.292

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.191 · 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