Grassland soil organic carbon and the effects of irrigated cropping in Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract High heterogeneity in the spatial distribution of soil organic carbon (SOC) in grasslands causes uncertainty in estimating its content and storage. In this study, we investigated the spatial distribution of SOC content and storage in the prairies of southern Alberta, Canada, and how it is affected by land use such as irrigated cropping and other environmental conditions such as cattle grazing, slope landscape position and dominant plant species. The mean SOC content was determined to be 11.5 g kg –1 (range: 8.9 to 22.4 g kg –1 ) in the 0–10 cm layer and 6.8 g kg –1 (range: 4.0 to 13.3 g kg –1 ) in the 10–30 cm layer; mean SOC storage was 1.59 kg C m –2 (range: 1.23 to 2.78 kg C m –2 ) in the 0–10 cm layer and 2.07 kg C m –2 (range: 1.21 to 3.62 kg C m –2 ) in the 10–30 cm layer. The SOC content was significantly affected by slope position in both the 0–10 and 10–30 cm layers, in the following order: bottom >middle > top position. Moreover, SOC storage was higher in sites dominated by shrubs than graminoid/forb communities. Thus, SOC content and storage had distinctly clustered spatial patterns throughout the study area and were significant differences between the 0–10 and 10–30 cm soil layers. Prior land‐use change from arid grassland to irrigated cropland increased SOC content and storage in bulk 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 | 0.000 | 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".