Optimum Dosage of Hyper-Thermophilic Aerobic Compost (HTAC) Produced from Sewage Sludge for Rice Yield
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Hyper-thermophilic bacteria can shorten the duration of composting process. This study aimed to elucidate the applicability and the optimum fertilization amount of hyper-thermophilic aerobic compost (HTAC) for rice growth and yield. The stem height, tillers number and rice yields in the treatments with HTAC significantly increased with increasing fertilization amount. But the ripening rate of grain was found to be lower at higher fertilization amount (250 and 500 kg N/ha). The rice yield in 180 kg N/ha HTAC treatment was 5.38 t/ha, which is similar with that using recommended amount of chemical fertilizer. The N and P concentrations in surface water of 180 kg N/ha HTAC treatment before midsummer drainage were lower than 1 mg/L and 0.1 mg/L, reaching the environmental quality standard. Thus, the optimal fertilization amount of HTAC was deemed as 180 kg N/ha when considering the plant quality and environmental friendliness.
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".