MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289434917 · doi:10.1002/ps.4238

Mineralisation and degradation of 2,4‐dichlorophenoxyacetic acid dimethylamine salt in a biobed matrix and in topsoil

2016· article· en· W2289434917 on OpenAlexafffundabout
J. Diane Knight, Allan J. Cessna, Dean Ngombe, Tom M Wolfe

Bibliographic record

VenuePest Management Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPesticide and Herbicide Environmental Studies
Canadian institutionsHog Administrative Marketing Services (Canada)Agriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaBayer CropScienceMinistry of Agriculture - Saskatchewan
KeywordsTopsoilDimethylamineMatrix (chemical analysis)ChemistryEnvironmental chemistry2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acidEnvironmental scienceSoil waterSoil scienceChromatographyBotanyOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Biobeds are used for on-farm bioremediation of pesticides in sprayer rinsate and from spills during sprayer filling. Using locally sourced materials from Saskatchewan, Canada, a biobed matrix was evaluated for its effectiveness for mineralising and degrading 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid dimethylamine salt (2,4-D DMA) compared with the topsoil used in the biobed matrix. RESULTS: Applying 2,4-D DMA to the biobed matrix caused a 2-3 day lag in CO2 production not observed when the herbicide was applied to topsoil. Despite the initial lag, less residual 2,4-D was measured in the biobed (0%) matrix than in the topsoil (57%) after a 28 day incubation. When the herbicide was applied 5 times to the biobed matrix, net CO2 increased immediately after each 2,4-D DMA application. Mineralisation of 2,4-D DMA was 61.9% and residual 2,4-D in the biobed matrix was 0.3% after 60 days, compared with corresponding values of 32.9 and 70.9% in topsoil. CONCLUSION: The biobed matrix enhanced the mineralisation and degradation of 2,4-D DMA, indicating the potential for successful implementation of biobeds under Canadian conditions. The biobed matrix was more effective for mineralising and degrading the herbicide compared with the topsoil used in the biobed matrix. By correcting for biobed matrix and formulation blank, CO2 evolution was a reliable indicator of 2,4-D DMA mineralisation. © 2016 Society of Chemical Industry.

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 score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.083

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePest Management ScienceSame topicPesticide and Herbicide Environmental StudiesFrench-language works237,207