MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2801455482 · doi:10.5539/jas.v10n6p136

Soil Nutrient Status and Cowpea Biological Nitrogen Fixation in a Maize-Cowpea Rotation Under Conservation Farming

2018· article· en· W2801455482 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Richard Sichone, Alice M. Mweetwa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgronomyMonocroppingFertilizerCrop rotationNutrientNitrogenEnvironmental scienceChemistryAgricultureBiologyCroppingCrop

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reports the impacts of a four-year maize-cowpea rotation under conservation farming on selected soil chemical, physical and biological properties with or without 100 kg/ha of Nitrogen: Phosphorus: Potassium: Sulphur (10:20:10:65) compound fertilizer. The study took advantage of an already established 4-year maize-cowpea rotation site and a maize monocrop field from which soil samples were collected for selected chemical, physical and biological analyses, and for setting up a greenhouse experiment for the determination of biological nitrogen fixation capabilities of cowpea. The results suggest that maize-cowpea rotations and addition of fertilizer influence particular chemical, physical and biological attributes of the soil in a varied manner. Rotating maize and cowpea has no influence on soil reaction, soil organic carbon, micronutrients, and exchangeable bases except for potassium. However, the addition of fertilizer to the maize-cowpea rotation reduces total nitrogen, while increasing the levels of sulphur and phosphorus in both the rotation and maize monocrop. Soil bulk density, total porosity and infiltration rate are not influenced by the maize-cowpea rotation with or without fertilizer amendment. Rotating maize with cowpea without the addition of fertilizer can result in an increase in plant available water, an observation needing further study. It can also be concluded that maize-cowpea rotations can reduce microbial biomass, regardless of fertilizer amendment, thus suggesting a need to understand maize and cowpea rhizopheric attributes affecting microbial biomass levels. Under the current conditions, the amount of biologically fixed nitrogen by cowpea is reduced by the application of fertilizer but not influenced by the rotation. Since these findings are based on four-year crop rotation, it is being recommended that further work be conducted to continue monitoring soil so as to factor in the effect of length of time.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural Science→Same topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics→French-language works237,207→