Residual Effect of Ammonium Sulfate Substitution on Soil Properties and Productivity of Plant and Ratoon Cane
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Overuse of the Ammonium Sulfate (AS) fertilizer in the long-term sugarcane cultivation has a negative impact on the soil properties which in turn can decrease soil and crop productivity. The study to describe the residual effect of AS substitute fertilizers on soil physico-chemical properties and cane productivity compared with AS fertilizer, was conducted at up-land in East Java during two cycles of the sugarcane growth (plant cane and ratoon cane). There were ten treatments which were tested consisting of three treatments using AS fertilizer, six treatments using the AS substitute fertilizer, and one control (without the use of the fertilizers). The measured variables were soil bulk density, total N, SO42- content, soil pH, and yield variables. The use of the AS fertilizer substitute decreased the soil bulk density and increased the total N, SO42- content, and soil pH at the post-harvest of plant and ratoon cane. It confirmed a better condition in the soil with the AS fertilizer substitute rather than the AS fertilizer by itself. The residual effect of the AS fertilizer substitute on the soil properties at the post-harvest of plant cane significantly provided a positive impact on cane and sugar yield at the ratoon cane. The soil SO42- and total soil N content were the most important soil properties that influenced cane and sugar yield of ratoon cane. It suggests that the use of the AS fertilizer substitute is recommended on sugarcane cultivation for minimizing adverse residual effect and maintaining the soil quality.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".