MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2169770831 · doi:10.2134/jeq2005.0409

Predicting Phosphorus Availability from Soil‐Applied Composted and Non‐Composted Cattle Feedlot Manure

2006· article· en· W2169770831 on OpenAlexaff
Francis Zvomuya, Bobbi L. Helgason, Francis J. Larney, H. H. Janzen, O. O. Akinremi, Barry M. Olson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Quality · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaAgriculture Food and Rural DevelopmentAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoamManureAgronomyPhosphorusFertilizerFeedlotNutrientCanolaCompostAnimal scienceAmendmentSoil conditionerChemistryEnvironmental scienceSoil waterBiologySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Prediction of phosphorus (P) availability from soil-applied composts and manure is important for agronomic and environmental reasons. This study utilized chemical properties of eight composted and two non-composted beef cattle (Bos taurus) manures to predict cumulative phosphorus uptake (CPU) during a 363-d controlled environment chamber bioassay. Ten growth cycles of canola (Brassica napus L.) were raised in pots containing 2 kg of a Dark Brown Chernozemic clay loam soil (fine-loamy, mixed, Typic Haploboroll) mixed with 0.04 kg of the amendments. Inorganic P fertilizer (KH2PO4) and an unamended control were included for comparison. All treatments received a nutrient solution containing an adequate supply of all essential nutrients, except P, which was supplied by the amendments. Cumulative P uptake was similar for composted (74 mg kg-1 soil) and non-composted manures (60 mg kg-1 soil) and for the latter and the fertilizer (40 mg kg-1 soil). However, the CPU was significantly higher for organic amendments than the control (24 mg kg-1 soil) and for composted manure than the fertilizer. Apparent phosphorus recovery (APR) from composted manure (24%) was significantly lower than that from non-composted manure (33%), but there was no significant difference in APR between the organic amendments and the fertilizer (27%). Partial least squares (PLS) regression indicated that only two parameters [total water-extractable phosphorus (TPH2O) and total phosphorus (TP) concentration of amendments] were adequate to model amendment-derived cumulative phosphorus uptake (ACPU), explaining 81% of the variation in ACPU. These results suggest that P availability from soil-applied composted and non-composted manures can be adequately predicted from a few simple amendment chemical measurements. Accurate prediction of P availability and plant P recovery may help tailor manure and compost applications to plant needs and minimize the buildup of bioavailable P, which can contribute to eutrophication of sensitive aquatic systems.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations80
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental QualitySame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207