Short-term legacy effects of feedlot manure amendments on surface soil CO<sub>2</sub> efflux under irrigated silage barley in Southern Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The short-term legacy effects following long-term (17 yr) feedlot manure application on CO2 efflux for a surface soil (clay loam) were studied over 2 yr (2016–2017) on a Dark Brown Chernozem in southern Alberta. The five treatments were stockpiled (SM) or composted (CM) manure with either straw (ST) or wood-chips (WD) bedding applied at 77 Mg·ha−1 (dry wt.) and an unamended control (CON). Surface soil efflux was measured during the growing season of the 2 yr using the dynamic, closed-chamber method. Ancillary measurements (soil water and temperature, total carbon, bulk density) were also obtained. Soil CO2 efflux was similar (P > 0.05) among the four amended treatments in the first (0.63–0.86 g·m−2·h−1) and second (0.40–0.46 g·m−2·h−1) years. However, soil CO2 efflux was significantly greater for amended than unamended treatments by 54–110% in the first year (CON = 0.41 g·m−2·h−1) and by 33–53% in the second year (CON = 0.30 g·m−2·h−1). Soil CO2 efflux was similar for SM and CM in both years and was significantly greater for WD than ST bedding in the first but not second year. Weak positive correlations (r ≤ 0.39) occurred between soil CO2 efflux and total soil C, water-filled pore space (WFPS), and soil temperature. Overall, our findings suggested that legacy effects of manure may persist for 1–2 yr following discontinued applications, but are mostly restricted to greater soil CO2 efflux for amended than unamended 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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".