MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2353622119

Spatial and Temporal Variation Characteristics of Cation and Anion in Phragmites communis-Soil System,Heilongjiang Province

2015· article· en· W2353622119 on OpenAlexaff
Gao Yua

Bibliographic record

VenueAnhui nongye kexue · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Soil, Plant Science
Canadian institutionsScience North
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhragmitesPotassiumMagnesiumSodiumChemistrySulfateCalciumChlorideNitrateEnvironmental chemistryAgronomyEcologyWetlandBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper got the contents of the chloride( Cl-),nitrate( NO-3),sulfate( SO2-4),potassium( K+),sodium( Na+),magnesium( Mg2 +),calcium( Ca2 +) in soil and Phragmites communis by ion chromatography and elemental analysis of 5 sampling sites in Heilongjiang Province,from June to October in 2011. The objective of this study was to analyze spatial and temporal variation characteristics of chloride( Cl-),nitrate( NO-3),sulfate( SO2-4),potassium( K+),sodium( Na+),magnesium( Mg2 +),calcium( Ca2 +) in Phragmites communis-soil ecosystem in Heilongjiang Province. The main results were drawn as following: The average contents of chloride,nitrate,sulfate,potassium,sodium,magnesium,calcium in Phragmites communis were higher than in soil. The spatial variation of chloride,potassium,sodium in soil were homogeneous,Daqing reached the highest content during this three kinds of anions. The spatial variation of magnesium and calcium were homogeneous,Mudanjiang reached the highest content during this two kinds of anions. Tongjiang and Daqing reached the lowest content. The spatial variation of chloride,nitrate,sulfate,potassium,sodium,magnesium,calcium in Phragmites communis were lowest in Tongjiang. The influence factor maybe the climatic.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnhui nongye kexueSame topicAgriculture, Soil, Plant ScienceFrench-language works237,207