Effect of bentonite as a soil amendment on field water-holding capacity, and millet photosynthesis and grain quality
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A field experiment was conducted in a semi-arid region in northern China to evaluate the effects of bentonite soil amendment on field water-holding capacity, plant available water, and crop photosynthesis and grain quality parameters for millet [ Setaria italic (L.) Beauv.] production over a 5-year period. Treatments included six rates of bentonite amendments (0, 6, 12, 18, 24 and 30 Mg ha −1 ) applied only once in 2011. The application of bentonite significantly ( P < 0.05) increased field water-holding capacity and plant available water in the 0–40 cm layer. Bentonite also significantly ( P < 0.05) increased the emergence rate, above-ground dry matter accumulation (AGDM), net photosynthesis rate (Pr), transpiration rate (Tr), soil and plant analysis development (SPAD) and leaf water use efficiency (WUE). It also increased grain quality parameters including grain protein, fat and fiber content. Averaged over all the years, the optimum rate of bentonite was 24 Mg ha −1 for all plant growth and photosynthesis parameters except for grain quality where 18 Mg ha −1 bentonite had the greatest effect. This study suggests that bentonite application in semi-arid regions would have beneficial effects on crop growth and soil water-holding properties.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 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 it