Speciation and sorption of phosphorus in agricultural soil profiles of redoximorphic character
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Controlled drainage is considered as a soil management tool to improve water supply to crops and reduce nutrient losses from fields; however, its closure may affect phosphorus (P) mobilization in soil. To assess the P mobilization potential, three soil profiles with redoximorphic features were selected along a slight hill in Northern Germany. Soil samples from three depths of each profile were characterized for basic properties, total element content, oxalate- and dithionite-extractable pedogenic Al, Fe and Mn (hydr)oxides, P pools (sequential extraction), P species [PK-edge X-ray absorption near-edge structure (XANES) spectroscopy] and P sorption behavior. In topsoil (~ 10 cm depth), labile P (H2O-P + resin-P + NaHCO3-P) accounted for 26–32% of total P (Pt). PhosphorusK-edge XANES revealed that up to 49% of Ptwas bound to Al and/or Fe (hydr)oxides, but sequential fractionation indicated that > 30% of this P was occluded within sesquioxide aggregates. A low binding capacity for P was demonstrated by P sorption capacity and lowKfcoefficients (20–33 $${\text{mg}}^{{1 - n_{\text{f}} }} \,{\text{L}}^{{n_{\text{f}} }} \,{\text{kg}}^{ - 1}$$ mg1-nfLnfkg-1 ) of the Freundlich equation. In the subsoil layers (~ 30 and ~ 65 cm depth), higher proportions of Al- and Fe-bound P along with other characteristics suggested that all profiles might be prone to P mobilization/leaching risk under reducing conditions even if the degree of P saturation (DPS) of a profile under oxic conditions was < 25%. The results suggest that a closure of the controlled drainage may pose a risk of increased P mobilization, but this needs to be compared with the risk of uncontrolled drainage and P losses to avoid P leaching into the aquatic ecosystem.
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".