MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2939773615 · doi:10.5539/jas.v11n5p58

Production and Decomposition of Cover Crop Residues and Associations With Soil Organic Fractions

2019· article· en· W2939773615 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
José Carlos Mazetto Júnior, José Luiz Rodrigues Torres, Danyllo Denner de Almeida Costa, Venâncio Rodrigues e Silva, Zigomar Menezes de Souza, Ernane Miranda Lemes

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas GeraisFundação AgrisusConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e TecnológicoCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsCover cropAgronomyMonocultureCrop residueHuminEnvironmental scienceDecompositionSoil carbonBiomass (ecology)Total organic carbonSoil organic matterCropChemistrySoil waterSoil scienceEnvironmental chemistryBiologyAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The decomposition of plant residues, the changes in the total organic carbon (TOC) and the fractions of soil organic matter (SOM) occur differently in irrigated areas. The objective of this study was to quantify the biomass production, the decomposition of cover crops residues and relate them with the changes n the content and fractions of SOM in an irrigated area of vegetable crops. Six types of cover crop treatments were evaluated: brachiaria (B); sunn hemp (S); millet (M); B + S; B + M; S + M, plus an additional treatment (native area), with 4 repetitions. The production of fresh (FB) and dry biomass (DB), the rate of plant residue decomposition, TOC, SOM fractions and the coefficient of SOM (QSOM) were quantified. It was observed that the greatest and the lowest volume of crop residues were from the B and S cover crop, respectively. The cover crops in monoculture presented great decomposition rates and short half-life when compared to mixtures of cover crop. The TOC and QSOM were great in the 0 to 0.05 m soil layer, and in the M + S cover crop mixture, when compared to the 0.05 to 0.1 m soil layer and to other cover crops. Among the SOM fractions, the humin predominated in the most superficial soil layer (0 to 0.05 m).

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.871
Threshold uncertainty score0.134

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.211 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207