MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331049176 · doi:10.1139/cjss-2015-0052

Nitrous oxide emissions as affected by liquid and solid pig manures applied to annual and perennial forage crops on a sandy loam soil

2016· article· en· W2331049176 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Paligwendé Nikièma, O. O. Akinremi, Mario Tenuta

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaInternational Institute for Sustainable Development
FundersInfrastructure CanadaNational Science Council
KeywordsLoamManureManure managementNitrous oxideAgronomyPerennial plantForageGrowing seasonEnvironmental scienceAnimal scienceChemistrySoil waterSoil scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Emissions of nitrous oxide (N2O-N) from manure applied to annual crop (AC) and perennial forage (PF) are poorly quantified for the Canadian Prairie Region. This study used static chambers over two growing seasons to assess soil N2O-N emissions from solid pig manure (SPM) and liquid pig manure (LPM) in AC and PF systems on a sandy loam soil. In 2011, when manure application coincided with hot and wet soil conditions, both manure treatments in AC induced N2O-N emission episodes a week later. In the PF, however, only LPM resulted in an N2O-N emission peak after 8 d. In 2012, manure application did not coincide with hot and wet soil conditions, and emission rates were smaller. Overall, the effect of manure type was inconsistent. In 2011, cumulative emissions in AC from LPM and SPM were 5.8 and 7.8 kg N2O-N ha−1, respectively, and in PF were 10.7 and 0.6 kg N2O-N ha−1, respectively. In 2012, cumulative emissions were <1 kg N2O-N ha−1, except LPM in PF. In 2011, LPM had significantly higher emission factor (EF ≍ 7%) than SPM (≤0.2%) in both AC and PF, whereas in 2012 manure type had no effect on EF (≍ 0). Over the two growing seasons and across manure types, EF did not differ between AC and PF. These results suggest that SPM would reduce N2O-N emission relative to LPM when conditions favor intense denitrification.

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 score0.174
Threshold uncertainty score0.346

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 communication0.0010.000
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 head0.213
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations14
Published2016
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Soil ScienceSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207