Effects of Soil Storage at Freezing Temperatures on Soil Enzymatic Activities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil enzyme activities are good indicators of soil health. It has been hypothesized that soil storage before analysis might affect microbial function. The objective of the present study was to determine if soil storage at -20 and -80°C affects soil enzymatic activities. Soil samples were collected and stored for four weeks at -20 and -80°C. Activities of nine enzymes were measured in fresh samples and every two weeks during storage. Overall, nine enzymes were targeted including β-Glucosidase (BG), Cellobiohydrolase (CBH), β-N-Acetylglucosaminidase (NAGase), Aryl Sulfatase (AS), Acid Phosphatase (AP), Alkaline Phosphatase (AlP), Glycine Aminopeptidase (GAP), Leucine Aminopeptidase (LAP) and Peroxidase (PER). With the exception of GAP and LAP, no significant differences were observed between samples stored at -20°C for 2 weeks compared to controls. Storage at -80°C for two weeks resulted in a decrease in all the enzyme activities except for PER, BG, and LAP. With the exception of PER, storage at -20 and -80°C decreases the activities of all the enzymes tested after four weeks of storage. These changes varied with specific enzyme targeted. Further studies should be conducted to determine how these low storage temperatures affect microbial diversity and abundance.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".