MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6991935457

THE INFLUENCE OF SOIL AMENDMENTS (COAL FLY ASH, AND STABILIZED BIOSOLIDS) ON THE PLANT PARASITIC NEMATODE Meloidogyne hap\\a\\ INCLUDING FREE LIVING NEMATODES, MICROBES AND SOIL CHEMICAL PROPERTIES

2009· article· en· W6991935457 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholarship@Western (Western University) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicNematode management and characterization studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiosolidsAmendmentSoil conditionerLoamFly ashGreenhouseSewage sludgeNematodeField experiment
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Field and greenhouse soil studies were designed to test the effect of stabilized biosolids and coal fly ash as management on the plant-parasitic nematode Meloidogyne hapla. The trials were conducted in a Bryanston silt loam in Southwestern Ontario formed on a calcareous substrate. Fly ash was obtained from the Lambton Generating station in Sarnia, Ontario and stabilized biosolids from lagoons at Glencoe, Ontario. Field and greenhouse crops included carrot (Daucus carota L.) and tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill), each grown from seeds. Amendment ratios of biosolids and fly ash and application rates were established based on international guidelines and previous studies for the use of biosolids and ash in soils. Field trials included amendments of 1.5%, 3%, 4.5%, 6%, and 7.5% (w/w) of each raw material. Greenhouse trials included additions of 2.5%, 5%, 7.5%, 10%, and 12.5% (w/w) of each raw material. Changes in parameters that might affect nematode viability were monitored including electrical conductivity, pH, biocontrol agents (bacterial and fungal colony forming units), selected heavy metals (As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, Zn), and plant yield. Carrot yield was improved with increased amendments while infested carrots did not show visible nematode damage. Tomatoes grown with amendments showed improved yields relative to controls in the presence of nematode infection. None of the amendment application rates altered EC, pH, CFU, or metals enough to impact nematode populations. It can be concluded that the amendment application rates tested in this study for the raw materials used were below threshold levels that impact nematode populations. Future work should take into consideration the impact of the raw materials on parameters that control nematodes so that application rates include levels (upper and lower) that affect nematode variability.

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)0.000
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 score0.481
Threshold uncertainty score0.590

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.262
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 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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholarship@Western (Western University)Same topicNematode management and characterization studiesFrench-language works237,207