Fractionation of P in soil as influenced by a single addition of liquid swine manure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Limited information exists as to the short-term effect of liquid swine manure on P distribution in soil. To address this issue, forms and distribution of inorganic P (Pi) and organic P (Po) at 2 wk and 16 wk after manure addition were investigated through a sequential extraction procedure. An Orthic Black Chernozem was sampled from a field research plot (Dixon, SK) without previous manure and urea additions. Liquid swine manure and urea were applied at rates of 0, 100 and 400 mg N kg−1, corresponding 10 and 40 mg P kg−1 from manure. Manure addition did not increase the most labile P fractions in soil. Instead the initial fate of the P from the manure was mainly to enter moderately labile and stable fractions such as calcium phosphate and organic P forms. This is consistent with observations in the field that a single application of swine effluent does not have a large impact on extractable "available" P in the soil. Further studies are needed to determine how much manure P loading is required for saturation of the "fixed pool" of P in Saskatchewan soils. Key words: Phosphorus fractions, sequential P extraction, incubation, urea, swine manure, anion exchange membrane
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".