SOIL QUALITY AND GROWTH PERFORMANCE OF CROPS OF AGROECOSYSTEMS IN THE VICINITY OF FLUORITE MINING
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigated the influence of fluoride on the number of macrofauna species on the soil surface and in the upper soil layer (0-10 cm depth) and crop growth performance on agricultural lands in the vicinity of fluorite mining activities in District Loralai, Balochistan, Pakistan. Results demonstrated that ants were sensitive to the fluoride above the concentration of 55 mg kg -1 soil; whereas, grasshoppers, crickets, spiders and toothed earwigs were tolerant to high fluoride concentrations (e.g. 74 mg kg -1 soil). The concentration of fluoride in soil was positively correlated with the concentration of fluoride in vegetables (R 2 = 0.75; P0.05 for leaves, R 2 = 0.48 P0.05 for fruits, R 2 = 0.81 P0.05 for stems and R 2 = 0.61 P0.05 for roots). Crop growth performance parameters such as yield and nutrient efficiency ratios concerning nitrogen and phosphorus had no obvious relationships with the concentrations of soil organic matter or fluoride in soil. These results conclude that concentration of fluoride in soil might have had negative influence on soil fauna and crop growth performance as no relationship was found between these parameters with the soil quality indicator i.e. soil organic matter.
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 | 0.000 | 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".