MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6884638613 · doi:10.1155/aess/1590143

Use of Poultry Litter‐Based Fertilizers in Calcareous Soil: Effects on Corn Growth and Selected Properties

2025· article· en· W6884638613 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueApplied and Environmental Soil Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicComposting and Vermicomposting Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersKing Saud University
KeywordsPoultry litterCalcareousBiocharNutrientFertilizerMoistureAridAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continual rise in poultry production to meet increasing food demand also generates a huge amount of waste. This accumulating waste can lead to soil, water, and air contamination if not properly managed. Efficient management and utilization of poultry waste is one of the key steps toward ensuring agricultural and environmental sustainability. Direct application of fresh poultry litter (PL) to soil is a potential option; however, its high moisture content, unpleasant odor, and high nutrient loss potential, especially under arid conditions, can limit this option. Conversion of PL to more stable fertilizers may be a more sustainable practice for its utilization in arid soil. Therefore, a greenhouse study was conducted to evaluate the effect of organic fertilizers derived from PL on corn growth and nutrition in a calcareous soil. The experimental treatments included: raw poultry litter (RPL), composted PL (CPL), pelletized CPL (PCPL), and PL converted to biochar (PLBC) in addition to a control. These treatments were applied at rates of 5, 10, and 15 t·ha −1 , except for the control, which received only a single dose of recommended mineral fertilizers. The plant growth response to treatments varied according to the type of fertilizer and rate of application. The PLBC added at 10 and 15 t·ha −1 showed significantly higher plant height, shoot weight, and root dry weight, followed by the same rates of CPL compared to other treatments. Relative to the control, PLBC increased plant height by 0.3%, 18.6%, and 21.1% for the application rates of 5, 10, and 15 t·ha −1 , respectively. The shoot content of N and P did not statistically differ among all treatments, whereas the K content was significantly higher in PLBC when applied at 15 t·ha −1 . Calcium concentration was also increased in the corn, with PLBC producing a 9.7%, 9.7%, and 16.7% increase, respectively, over the control, for the application rates of 5, 10, and 15 t·ha −1 , respectively. The PLBC applied at 15 t·ha −1 significantly increased soil nitrate (58 mg·kg −1 ), available P (49 mg·kg −1 ), available K (189 mg·kg −1 ), and organic matter (1.96%). The PLBC can improve several soil properties and create favorable conditions for plant growth, and this may explain its best performance in the current study. Overall, poultry‐derived organic fertilizers have greater potential for improving corn growth and soil conditions, compared to RPL. Further long‐term studies in the field are required to validate the current findings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.186
Teacher spread0.174 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueApplied and Environmental Soil ScienceSame topicComposting and Vermicomposting TechniquesFrench-language works237,207