The effects of liquid hog manure application and tillage systems on the rate of cereal crop residue decomposition in clay soils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The burning of cereal residues is a means of prirnary residue managernent often employed in the fine textured soils of the Red River Valley in southern Manitoba, Canada.Producers in the area have cited the need for residue burning to alleviate the negative effects that heavy loading rates of cereal residues can have on the subsequent growth and perfonnance of annual cereal and oilseed crops following a cereal crop.These effects rnay include delayed seedling emergence, imrnobilization of nitrogen fertilizers or increased crop disease pressure.A suite of field and laboratory microcosm studies was completed to examine the effects of tillage system intensity and liquid lnanure application to these clay soils, amended with abundant quantities of cereal residue, on the resulting rate of cereal crop residue decornposition, measured as residue mass loss and soil COz and N2O respiration.One growth cabinet litterbag study, two field studies and two controlled atrnosphere rnicrocosm studies were designed to examine the effects of zero, chisel plow and V-disk primary tillage systerns, with and without the application of 100 kg ha-l liquid manure nitrogen on soil respiration activity.Manure application was found to have a significant positive effect on the rate of residue mass loss and soil COz and N2O respiration.Increasing tillage systems intensity was also found to stimulate soil microbial activity and increase the availability of residue carbon to soil microbial communities through incorporation, resulting in an increase in the rate of COz respiration.Spring wheat and canola yields were not affected by tillage system; however, canola yield was greater when crop nutrition was supplied as liquid hog manure as 1t opposed to commercial fertilizer.management through straw burning and crop quality in the clay soil prolonged use of stubble burning negative irnpacts on soil rnicrobial potential.Results frorn this study indicate that residue is not necessary to maintain high annual crop yields region of southem Manitoba and suggest that the residue management practice may have long-term activity and soil carbon and nitrogen mineralization iii vii
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) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".