MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134293243 · doi:10.1139/cjss-2020-0129

Phosphorus saturation index and water-extractable phosphorus in high-legacy phosphorus soils in southern British Columbia, Canada

2021· article· en· W3134293243 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Aimé J. Messiga, Camellia Lam, Yunkun Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsSilageSaturation (graph theory)Soil waterPhosphorusAgronomyAnimal scienceEnvironmental scienceNutrientChemistryMathematicsSoil scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding of the risk of phosphorus (P) loss to the environment is crucial to monitor soil P and implement policies for P management. We assessed P sorption characteristics and adapted a P saturation index (PSI) for silage corn and blueberry fields in south coastal British Columbia (BC), Canada. We used 284 composite soil samples with contrasting P levels collected from eight silage corn and 23 blueberry fields across south coastal BC. The P sorption maximum (Smax) varied between 982 and 2532 mg P·kg−1 and was influenced by aluminum concentration and organic matter content. The degree of P saturation was related to water-extractable P (Pw) by a quadratic regression with R2 = 0.85. A critical Pw = 3.7 mg·kg−1 was established across the two cropping systems. The silage corn fields with pH > 5.5 had critical PSI value of 10.4%, and blueberry fields with pH < 4.7 had critical PSI value of 18.0%. These results showed that the risk of P loss from soil in the silage corn was high, but it was low for blueberry because the critical PSI for silage corn fields was lower than for blueberry fields, and therefore, saturation would be more easily reached, even though more P is applied to blueberry fields. The combination of a critical PSI and Pw as agri-environmental indicators will help farmers and professionals to identify fields with risk of P loss, to implement a nutrient management plan, and to monitor how this risk changes with time.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.160

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.004
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.163 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Soil ScienceSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207