Impacts of experimental conditions on soil saturated hydraulic conductivity in conventional and conservation tillage practices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The saturated hydraulic conductivity (Ksat) is a key soil hydraulic property governing agricultural production. However, the influence of conversion from conventional tillage (CT) to conservation tillage (CS) (including no tillage (NT) and reduced tillage (RT)) on Ksat of soils is not well understood and still debated. In this study, we applied a global meta-analysis method to synthesize 201 paired observations for soil Ksat from 59 published studies, and investigated factors influencing the effects of conversion to CS on Ksat. Results showed that the Ksat measured by hood infiltrometer, tension disc infiltrometer, and Guelph permeameter produced a similar pattern under CS practices, with non-significant (p > 0.05) increase of 6.6 %, 3.6 % and 4.9 %, respectively. However, conversion to CS significantly (p < 0.05) increased Ksat by 32.0 % for ring infiltrometer, while it decreased Ksat by 3.2 % for constant/falling head (p > 0.05). Soil layer, CS type and soil texture had no significant (p > 0.05) effects on the influence of conversion to CS on the Ksat, but the Ksat under CS showed a greater increase for a longer conversion period (time since conversion). In addition, mean annual temperature (MAT) was found to be an important driver controlling the response of Ksat to tillage conversion at the large scale. These findings suggested that quantifying the effects of tillage conversion on soil Ksat needed to consider experimental conditions, especially the measurement technique and conversion period.
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 | 0.015 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".