Does no-till cover crop influence in situ measured soil water potential and saturated hydraulic conductivity?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil water energy determines soil water balance, plant water uptake, and soil thermal properties, but the effects of cover crops (CCs) on in situ measured soil water energy and temperature are not well understood. This study investigated how CCs affect in situ measured soil water potential (SWP), temperature, and saturated hydraulic conductivity (Kfs) during 2 years, with the hypothesis that CC-induced water transpiration can lower SWP. The CCs used included crimson clover (Trifolium incarnatum L.), winter wheat (Triticum aestavum L.), hairy vetch (Vicia villosa), oats (Avena sativa), triticale (Titicale haxaploide Lart.), barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), flax (Linum usitatissimum L.), and winter peas (Lathyrus hirsutus L.). Soil water potential and temperature sensors were installed at 0–10, 10–20, and 20–30 cm depths. Additionally, Kfs was measured in situ using a Guelph permeameter. Results showed that actively growing CCs can lower SWP, leading to increased water transpiration from the field compared with no cover crop (NC) management. Also, by lowering soil temperature, CCs can increase evapotranspirational efficiency compared to NC management. Further, by increasing evapotranspirational efficiency, CC, management resulted in increased subsurface water infiltration and storage as shown by higher Kfs values compared to NC management. In general, CCs have the potential to reduce SWP and temperature during their growth stages and this can be beneficial to seed germination and microbial activities.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".