Soil phosphorus cycling is modified by carbon and nitrogen fertilization in a long‐term field experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background and aims : Phosphorus (P) is an essential element for crop growth. However, while links of P turnover in soils to carbon (C) and nitrogen (N) availability have been described, it remains to be clarified how combinations of fertilizer C and N additions affect stocks and cycling of distinct P fractions at different soil depths. The objectives of our study were (1) to assess how soil total P stocks are affected by organic amendments and N fertilization, (2) to evaluate how different soil P fractions respond to N fertilization, and (3) to verify whether N fertilization increases soil biological P cycling. Methods : We collected soil samples from a long‐term field experiment established in 1984 in Rauischholzhausen, Germany. The soil is a Haplic Luvisol and received either no organic fertilizer (NOF), farmyard manure (FYM) or a combination of organic and mineral N fertilizer (OMF). Each treatment additionally received three levels of mineral N: 0 kg ha −1 y −1 (N0), 100 kg ha −1 y −1 (N100), and 200 kg ha −1 y −1 (N200). The organic fertilizers were applied by a manure spreader and the N fertilizer (calcium ammonium nitrate) was applied in spring as top dressing by a plot fertilizer machine. We estimated stocks of P in fractions isolated by sequential P fractionation, and assessed the oxygen isotopic composition of 1 M HCl‐extractable phosphate (δ 18 O P ). Results : We found that increased organic matter (OM) addition and mineral N inputs caused significant decreases in the stocks of resin‐ and NaHCO 3 ‐extractable P in the topsoil (0–30 cm). Mineral N fertilization alone resulted in significant increases in stocks of resin‐, NaHCO 3 ‐, and NaOH‐extractable P in the upper subsoil (30–50 cm). These changes occurred for both inorganic and organic P. The subsoil δ 18 O P values were closer to expected equilibrium values in soil fertilized with mineral N, indicative of more intensive biological P cycling than in the treatments without mineral N inputs. Conclusions : These findings suggest that long‐term OM and mineral N fertilization promotes topsoil P losses from labile fractions by crop uptake with an enrichment of these P forms in the subsoil, and an overall increase in biological P cycling in both top‐ and subsoil horizons upon N fertilization.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".