MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396559657 · doi:10.1002/jeq2.20564

Release of phosphorus and metal(loid)s from manured soils to floodwater during a laboratory simulation of snowmelt flooding

2024· article· en· W4396559657 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Viranga Weerasinghe, Inoka Amarakoon, Darshani Kumaragamage, Nora J. Casson, Srimathie P. Indraratne, Douglas M. Goltz, Xiaopeng Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Quality · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WinnipegUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSnowmeltFlooding (psychology)Soil waterEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental chemistryPhosphorusHydrology (agriculture)ChemistrySurface runoffGeologySoil scienceEcologyGeotechnical engineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Phosphorus (P) and metal accumulation in manured agricultural soils and subsequent losses to waterways have been extensively studied; however, the magnitudes and the factors governing their losses during spring snowmelt flooding are less known. We examined the P and metal release from long‐term manured soil to floodwater under simulated snowmelt flooding with recent manure additions. Intact soil columns collected from field plots located in Randolph, Southern Manitoba, 2 weeks after liquid swine manure treatments (surface‐applied, injected, or control with no recent manure addition) were flooded and incubated for 8 weeks at 4 ± 1°C to simulate snowmelt conditions. Floodwater (syringe filtered through 0.45 µm) and soil porewater (extracted using Rhizon‐Mom samplers) samples were periodically extracted and analyzed for dissolved reactive phosphorus (DRP), pH, zinc (Zn), manganese (Mn), iron (Fe), magnesium (Mg), calcium (Ca), and arsenic (As). Mean floodwater DRP concentrations (mg L −1 ) for manure injected (2.0 ± 0.26), surface‐applied (2.6 ± 0.26), and control (2.2 ± 0.26) treatments did not differ significantly. Despite manure application, DRP loss to floodwater did not significantly increase compared to the control, possibly due to the elevated residual soil P at this site from the long‐term manure use. At the end of simulated flooding, the DRP concentrations increased by 1.5‐fold and 5‐fold in porewater and floodwater, respectively. Metal(loid) concentrations were not affected by manure treatments in general, except for Zn and Mg on certain days. Unlike DRP, where porewater and floodwater concentrations increased with time, metalloid concentration in porewater and floodwater did not show consistent trends with flooding time.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.286
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental QualitySame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207