MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386884644 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2023-0107

Sugar maple sap, soil, and foliar chemistry in response to non-industrial wood ash fertilizer in Muskoka, Ontario

2023· article· en· W4386884644 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemistry
TopicPlant-Derived Bioactive Compounds
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityTrent University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistère de l’Environnement, de la Protection de la nature et des ParcsOntario Trillium Foundation
KeywordsWood ashMapleChemistrySugarNutrientAceraceaeSweetnessFertilizerAgronomyTrace metalEnvironmental chemistryBotanyMetalBiologyFood science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non-industrial wood ash may be an effective forest soil nutrient supplement but its use in Canada is largely restricted because of unknown concentrations of trace metal contaminants. Sugar maple ( Acer saccharum Marshall) is particularly sensitive to low soil calcium (Ca) levels, and though maple syrup is of great economic importance in Canada, it is unknown how wood ash could affect sap chemistry. Non-industrial wood ash (NIWA; 6 Mg·ha −1 ) applied to experimental plots in Muskoka, Ontario was rich in Ca (27%), while metal concentrations were well below provincial regulatory limits. One-year post-application, significant increases were observed in the treated plots in the soil pH and base cations (Ca, K, and Mg) in the surface soil horizons, and metal concentrations in the litter. Sap yield in the control plots was significantly lower in the first-year post-application than in the second year, but no other differences were found. In both tapping years, sap sweetness remained similar and differences in nutrient and metal concentrations between treatments were generally small and inconsistent. Foliar chemistry remained largely unchanged 1 year following application, except for K that was twice as high in the treated plots. Ultimately, NIWA is unlikely to significantly alter sugar maple sap chemistry, indicating that it is a viable nutrient supplement that can enhance soil fertility in sugar bushes with no impact on sap sweetness.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.781
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.236 · 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