MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2401839191 · doi:10.1139/cjps-2016-0084

Biomass yield from an old grass field as affected by sources of nitrogen fertilization and management zones in northern areas

2016· article· en· W2401839191 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Gilles Bélanger, Athyna N. Cambouris, Gaétan Parent, Danielle Mongrain, Noura Ziadi, Isabelle Perron

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Plant Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgronomyHuman fertilizationBiomass (ecology)Environmental scienceFertilizerDry matterManureNitrogenField experimentBiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The efficiency of municipal biosolids (MB) and liquid swine manure (LSM) as fertilizers for old grass fields used for biomass production remains to be determined in northern areas. We determined the response of a 7 yr old grass field to organic and mineral N fertilization in two management zones. Soil and crop spatial variability was characterized, and two management zones were defined using soil electrical conductivity (EC). Nitrogen was applied at 160 kg total N ha−1 for 3 yr as MB, LSM, or mineral fertilizer (M) along with an unfertilized control. Seasonal dry matter (DM) yields were 61% with no N applied, 87% with MB, and 95% with LSM of that with M. The apparent N recovery with LSM (38%) and MB (27%) was less than with M (51%). Management zones did not differ in responses of DM yield and apparent N recovery to fertilization treatments. Fertilization treatments affected the number of species and the contribution of the main species to DM yield. We concluded that MB and LSM are valuable sources of N for biomass production from old grass fields in northern areas and EC-defined management zones are unlikely to improve N management in similar situations.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.190
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Plant Science→Same topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics→French-language works237,207→