Luvisolic soils of Canada: Genesis, distribution, and classification
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lavkulich, L. M. and Arocena, J. M. 2011. Luvisols of Canada: Genesis, distribution, and classification. Can. J. Soil Sci. 91: 781-806. Luvisols link the soil continuum on the Quaternary landscapes. These soils are developed from parent materials rich in Ca and Mg in a relatively humid climate. An acidic eluvial horizon overlying a phyllosilicate-enriched illuvial Bt horizon is the common horizon sequence in Luvisolic soils. Lessivage or the translocation of clays with minimal chemical alteration is the characteristic soil-forming process and results to the diagnostic Bt horizon with well-developed, oriented clay skins or cutans. These soils commonly form intergrades with Chernozems, Podzols and Vertisols. With time, the eluvial horizons experience increased chemical weathering and further release of sequioxides to form Brunisolic and Podzolic sequences within the eluvial Ae in biseqeual soils. Lessivage significantly influences several ecosystem functions of soils. The high amounts of phyllosilicates in the Bt horizon serve as one of the most active sorption sites in soils for metals and organic materials including soil carbon. Sorption of cations takes place through cation exchange reactions and determines the availability of cations to plant roots as well as in the “colloid facilitated transport” of strongly sorbing metals and organic pollutants. Clays in Bt can be restrictive to water and air movement as well as to root growth and distribution. Agricultural and forestry practices such as tillage can compact the structure of Luvisols and may decrease soil productivity.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".