Effect of Soil Moisture and Irrigation on Propargyl Bromide Volatilization and Movement in Soil
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Propargyl bromide (3‐bromo‐propyne, 3BP) is a potential replacement for the soil fumigant methyl bromide. Since little is known about its movement in soil, a study was conducted to compare the volatilization and movement of 3BP in the soil profile for different irrigation treatments. A rectangular soil column was used to simulate a bed–furrow system. The surface of the bed was covered with high‐density polyethylene (HDPE) plastic (i.e., a tarp). The furrow was left uncovered. Multiple volatilization chambers were used to measure emissions from the furrows, the slopes of the bed, and the bed. The soil was fumigated by injecting 1.0 mL of 3BP to the center of the column. Three treatments were studied, no irrigation, a single 5‐h surface irrigation 24 h after fumigation, and a 2‐h daily surface irrigation. Volatilization was about three times greater from nonirrigated soil. Irrigation and higher initial soil moisture content were more effective in controlling 3BP volatilization than the use of a HDPE tarp. Volatilization and degradation were similar for both irrigation treatments, but the 2‐h irrigation had the advantage of requiring one‐third less water. Volatilization rates from the slopes of the bed were lower than from the bed surface. To obtain accurate total mass, volatilization chambers should cover the whole bed–furrow system. Short advective gas and liquid fluxes created by the irrigation had pronounced and prolonged effect on 3BP distribution and degradation. Henry's Law could not be used to predict the 3BP distribution pattern in the liquid phase even long after the irrigation ceased.
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".