Phosphorus Fractions and Their Transformations in Entisol
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The availability of phosphorus in the soil is a factor that directly interferes with its absorption by plants. This availability can be influenced by the texture, dose of the phosphate fertilizer and the time of contact with the soil. This study aimed to quantify the organic and inorganic fractions of P accumulated in a sandy soil receiving doses of phosphorus, incubated and grown with rice. The experimental design was a completely randomized design, in a 4 × 3 factorial scheme, with four replicates, and four P doses (0, 80, 240, and 410 mg dm-3) and three evaluation times (before sowing, after harvest, and incubated). Soil samples were collected before, after incubation, and after rice harvesting, and then submitted to a chemical fractionation of P. P fractions were influenced by soil collection times. The inorganic fractions prevailed before sowing and after incubation, and the organic fractions prevailed after harvest. Phosphate fertilization favored mineralization of organic P and redistributes the inorganic and organic P fractions, between labile and non-labile compartments. The application of phosphate fertilizer in an Entisol Quartzipsamment contributes to the accumulation of inorganic fractions, especially in the most labile fractions.
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".