Response of Different Crop Cultivars to Micronutrient Fertilization and Relationship to Rhizosphere Soil Properties
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Five different cultivars each of wheat, pea, and canola were grown with and without copper (Cu), zinc (Zn), and boron (B) fertilization, respectively, in a greenhouse study to identify any crop cultivar and rhizosphere soil responses to micronutrient fertilization. The prairie agricultural surface soils (0–10 cm) used in the study were suspected to be micronutrient deficient according to soil extractable levels. Only durum wheat (CDC Fortitude) produced greater biomass from Cu fertilization compared to the other wheat cultivars. Cultivar dependent responses of pea and canola biomass yield to Zn and B fertilization were not significantly (P > .05) different. Boron concentration in whole plant canola tissue increased following fertilizer addition. Micronutrient fertilization increased concentrations and supply rates of available Cu, Zn, and B in post-harvest rhizosphere soil. Fertilizer Cu and Zn were distributed in labile soil solution-carbonate-exchangeable and oxyhydroxide fraction, whereas B was primarily found in the hot water-soluble fraction, specifically adsorbed and oxyhydroxide fractions. The composition of low molecular weight organic acids (formic, propionic, malic, and fumaric acid) in the rhizosphere soil varied among crops. Additionally, citric and tartaric acid were present in the pea and canola rhizosphere soils, respectively. The rhizosphere soil of durum wheat not fertilized with Cu contain higher levels of succinic acid compared to the other wheat cultivars. For pea and canola, there was no significant (P > .05) effect of cultivar on the amounts or forms of organic acids in the rhizosphere soils.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| 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".