MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226284660 · doi:10.5539/jas.v14n5p41

Nutrient Cycling of Cover Crops in an Amazonian Ecosystem

2022· article· en· W4226284660 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mauro da Silva Alves, Laís Alves da Gama, Bruna Nogueira Leite, Karla Gabrielle Dutra Pinto, Letícia de Paula Neves de Souza, Sônia Maria Figueiredo Albertino

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Management and Crop Yield
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do AmazonasCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsCover cropNutrient cycleNutrientCanavalia ensiformisAgronomyCyclingRandomized block designEcosystemMucunaEnvironmental scienceAgroforestryBiologyForestryEcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cover crops act to improve the chemical and physical quality of the soil and provide sustainability in agricultural systems. Studying the decomposition of these cover crops is key to understand the process of nutrient cycling in cultivation. The purpose of the study was to assess the decomposition and release of nutrients from cover crops in an Amazonian ecosystem. The experiment was conducted in a commercial guarana plantation area at farm Agropecuária Jayoro in Presidente Figueiredo-AM in two agricultural years (2018 and 2019), with a randomized block experimental design following a 4 × 4 factorial scheme, with four cover species (Arachis pintoi, Brachiaria ruziziensis, Canavalia ensiformis and Mucuna deeringiana) and four assessment periods (0, 60, 120, 180 days). The cover crops showed a high rate of decomposition of residues in the two years assessed. The legumes presented high initial nutrient contents. The release of N, P, Ca, and Mg was slower. K showed a rapid release from the decomposition of the residues of the assessed cover crops.

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)0.000
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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicSoil Management and Crop YieldFrench-language works237,207