Dynamics of Ions in Soils Irrigated with Saline Reject
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this work was to evaluate the variation in the electrical conductivity and the mobilization of ions present in reject brine from desalination plant of brackish well water in three types of soil. The mobilization of the contaminant ions in the reject brine was studied in glass percolation columns, which were filled with soil of contrasting textures (eutrophic CAMBISOL, typic dystrophic Red OXISOL, ENTISOL Quartzipsamment). Experiments ware repeated three times each, and the initial and final concentrations of the ion contaminants were analyzed. The pollution potential of this residue was determined by the retardation factor and dispersion-diffusion coefficient of Ca2+ and Mg2+, besides the variation of electrical conductivity along the profile of each soil studied. In the Red Oxisol, Ca2+ and Mg2+ ions move with greater ease resulting in possibility largest of potential of ground water contamination. In Entisol Quartzipsamment presented higher Mg2+ (R) ion advancement speed, that is, higher subsurface contamination power for these ions. The eutrophic Cambisol presented low diffusion-dispersion coefficient in all the evaluated ions and, therefore, lower mobility of the ions in the soil profile, and consequently, a greater possibility of contamination when irrigated with reject brine.
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) | 0.000 | 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".