MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2237094628 · doi:10.1111/ejss.12316

Recovery and dynamics of decomposing plant residue in soil: an evaluation of three fractionation methods

2016· article· en· W2237094628 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Soil Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsLakehead UniversityAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFractionationResidue (chemistry)ChemistryOrganic matterChromatographyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary Our goals in this study were to track the incorporation of plant residue into soil organic matter ( SOM ) and test the effectiveness of different fractionation methods to evaluate this transformation. We incubated soil amended with 13 C ‐labelled barley ( H ordeum vulgare L. ) residue and used three fractionation methods based on size (> 250, 53–250, 5–53 and < 5 µm) and density (< 1.7 g cm −3 , i.e. light fraction (LF) ) and determined its quantity and the rate of C loss or gain or both in these fractions as decomposition progressed. One method was based on size only, another involved density separation followed by size fractionation and a third separated organic matter fractions by size first and then by density. There were significant quantitative differences between the methods for the amount of residue in the fractions, but there was no effect of fractionation method on the rate of change in the residue that comprised the fractions. The density method did not appear to identify all of the most recently added (i.e. least decomposed) residue in the LF or that there was a redistribution of SOM among the fractions. The amount of residue C and the C : N ratio of the residue in the two smallest fractions increased early during the incubation (0–2 months), but subsequently decreased towards the end. The initially small C:N ratio in the clay fraction probably reflects the accumulation of microbial by‐products from the rapid decomposition of water‐soluble compounds. The subsequent increase and decrease in both residue C and C:N ratio reflects the balance of the accumulation of sorbed water‐soluble compounds and dense plant residue fragments and their mineralization over time. We conclude that clay is a sink for residue C (i.e. microbial metabolites) early during decomposition, and that there is a transfer among fractions and mineralization of residue C as decomposition proceeds. These findings indicate that the clay fraction contains a dynamic pool of C that can cycle within short time‐scales.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.890
Threshold uncertainty score0.331

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.251 · 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