MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2625450432 · doi:10.5539/sar.v6n3p64

Methane Emission from Pineapple Cultivation on a Tropical Peatland at Saratok, Malaysia

2017· article· en· W2625450432 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Liza Nuriati Lim Kim Choo, Osumanu Haruna Ahmed

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainable Agriculture Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Putra Malaysia
KeywordsPeatEnvironmental scienceMethaneSoil waterAgronomyMethanogenesisSoil respirationChemistrySoil scienceEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Information on methane emission in pineapple cultivation on peatlands is scarce. Methane emission in pineapple cultivation is important as 90% of pineapples are grown on the peat soils of Malaysia. It is essential to determine methane emission in pineapple cultivation because pineapples are Crassulacean acid metabolism plants whose effects on methane could be different from other crops grown on tropical peat soils. Methane emissions from root respiration, microbial respiration, and oxidative peat decomposition were determined in a lysimeter experiment. There were three treatments: peat soil cultivated with pineapple, bare peat soil, and bare peat soil fumigated with chloroform. Methane emissions from peat soil cultivated with pineapple, bare peat soil, and bare peat soil fumigated with chloroform were 0.65 t/ha/yr, 0.75 t/ha/yr, and 0.75 t/ha/yr, respectively. The lower methane emissions are consistent with the general believe that methane emission from cultivated peat soils is lower than those of anaerobic or water logged peat soils. Soil methane emission was affected by nitrogen fertilization under pineapple cultivation but the converse was true for soil temperature nor soil moisture.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.289 · 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.

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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainable Agriculture ResearchSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207