Soil Nitrogen Cycling as Influenced by Cover Crops in Saskatchewan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aims to study the viability of growing cover crops in a field crop rotation in Saskatchewan, and the influence of cover crops on soil N availability, cash crop N use, and its potential for reducing N2O emissions. The experiment was initiated in 2018 on sandy loam soil of a Dark Brown Chernozem of the Asquith association, and comprises a 4-year rotation sequence of wheat-canola-potato-pea grown with shoulder-season cover crops (red clover, berseem/oat, rye and tillage radish, respectively) and without cover crops. A short rotation (wheat-canola) and a perennial alfalfa are included as comparison treatments. The plots are arranged in a randomized complete block design with four replicates. Crop yield and biomass measurements are collected, as well as cover crop measurements (plant counts, heights, ground cover, aboveground biomass); samples are analyzed for %N to determine crop performance and N use. Soil inorganic N dynamics are monitored during fall to determine soil N availability and supply. Preliminary results show cover crops did not have any impact on crop yields, but certain cover crops might influence soil N availability in the fall. However, this study is still in its early stage and will continue in order to obtain substantial evidence.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".