Soil nematode community response to fertilisation in the root-associated and bulk soils of a rice-wheat agroecosystem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The practice of growing agricultural crops in rows results in larger soil nematode populations in the root-associated soil than in the bulk soil between the rows. Fertilisers applied to improve grain yield generally increase the abundance of nematode communities in agricultural soils. The objective of this study was to compare total nematode density and four dominant genera in the root-associated and bulk soils of paddy rice and upland wheat receiving organic and mineral fertilisers. Dominant nematode genera accounted for 80% of all nematodes and represented four trophic groups. There was greater total nematode density and a higher enrichment index (EI) but less nematode diversity (H′) and a lower structure index (SI) in the root-associated soil than bulk soil of upland wheat. By contrast, nematode abundance, diversity and ecological indices were similar in the root-associated and bulk soils of the paddy rice. Soil nematode communities were affected significantly and consistently by fertilisation in upland wheat and paddy rice phases. More herbivoreHirschmanniellawere present with mineral fertiliser than in the non-fertilised control. Straw-based organic fertilisers increased the abundance of bacterivoreEucephalobus. The lack of interaction between rhizosphere effect and fertilisation indicated that crop-growing conditions (different species and water regimes) were more influential on nematode communities and not consistently impacted by short-term organic and mineral fertilisation in the rice-wheat agroecosystem.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".