Plant and soil responses to nitrogen and phosphorus fertilization of bromegrass‐dominated haylands in Saskatchewan, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Field experiments were conducted at three different sites in Saskatchewan, Canada (Colonsay, Vanscoy and Rosthern) over two years (2005 and 2006) to determine the effects of dribble‐banded and coulter‐injected liquid fertilizer applied in the spring of 2005 at 56, 112 and 224 kg N ha−1 with and without P at 28 kg P2O5 ha−1. The three sites were unfertilized, 7‐ to 8‐year old stands of mainly meadow bromegrass (Bromus riparius)‐dominated haylands. All fertilization treatments produced significantly (P ≤ 0·05) higher dry matter yield than the control in the year of application at the three Saskatchewan sites. There was no significant difference between the two application methods (surface dribble band vs. coulter injected) for any fertilizer treatments. The addition of 28 kg P2O5 ha−1 P fertilizer along with the N fertilizer did not have a significant effect on yield in most cases. In the year of application, increasing N rates above 56 kg N ha−1 did not significantly increase yield over the 56 kg N ha−1 rate in most cases, but did increase N concentration, N uptake and protein concentration. A significant residual effect was found in the high N‐rate treatments in 2006, with significantly higher yield and N uptake. In 2005, the forage N and P uptake in the fertilized treatments were significantly higher than the control in all cases. The N uptake at the three Saskatchewan sites increased with increasing N rate up to the high rate of 224 kg N ha−1, although the percent recovery of applied N decreased with increasing rate. The P fertilization with 28 kg P2O5 ha−1 also increased P uptake. Overall, rates of fertilizer of approximately 56 kg N ha−1 appear to be sufficient to produce nearly maximum forage yield and protein concentration of the grass in the year of application.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".