Residual Effect of Bentonite-Humic Acid Amendment on Soil Health and Crop Performance 4-5 Years After Initial Application in a Dryland Ecosystem
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Degraded soils causing from natural and human affects are universal in arid and semi-arid regions all over the world. Bentonite and humic acid (BHA) are increasingly being tested to remediate these degraded lands with potential benefits on crop production and soil health. The objective of this paper was to determine the residual effects four to five years after a one-time BHA application at six rates on (i) dynamic changes in soil properties, and (ii) oat crop productivity parameters, in a dryland farming ecosystem. With increasing rates of one-time BHA application, soil profile water storage displayed a piecewise linear increase plus plateau, whereas soil electrical conductivity, pH and bulk density were all reduced significantly (P < 0.05) in the 0-20 cm and 20-60 cm layers. The improved soil environments gave rise to an increased activity of soil enzymes urease, invertase and catalase that respectively reached the peak values of 97%, 37% and 32% at the rates of 21 to 24 Mg BHA ha-1. These conversely boosted soil nutrient turnover, leading to a 40% higher soil available P. Compared with the control treatment, application of BHA at the estimated optimum rate (roughly 24 Mg ha-1) increased grain yield by 20%, protein yield by 62%, water use efficiency by 41%, and partial factor productivity of N by 20%. Results of this study showed for the first time that a one-time BHA application would be a new and effective strategy to combat land degradation, drought, and promote a sustainable soil micro-ecological environment in dryland agroecosystem under a varying climate scenario.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".