Magnetic susceptibility of Gleysolic and Chernozemic soils in Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Saskatchewan, Gleysolic and Chernozemic soils often are found close to each other in hummocky terrain. Magnetic susceptibility (χ) is known to be reduced in poorly drained soils compared to well-drained soils, and this study investigated the use of χ as an accessory criterion for identifying Gleysols. Archived soil samples from an area near Saskatoon were analyzed for χ and sand content, and where necessary for organic and inorganic C and oxalate (Feo) and dithionite (Fed) extractable iron. The lowest χ values were found in Humic Luvic Gleysols and the highest in Dark Brown Chernozems; Rego and Orthic Gleysols and Rego Humic Gleysols had χ values that overlapped those of the Dark Brown Chernozems. Within the upper 50 cm of the profile, all Gleysols except the Rego Humic Gleysol had at least one horizon with %chi; less than 150 × 10-9m3kg-1. The χ of the A and B horizons was negatively correlated to their Feo/Fed ratios, and not correlated to their sand content. The χ of the deep tills was positively correlated to sand content, and not correlated to Feo/Fed ratio. It appears that χ may be as useful as the Feo/Fed ratio for assisting in classifying Gleysols. Key words: Magnetic susceptibility, Gleysols, Chernozems, Feo, Fed, CaCo3
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".