MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7028329030

A field study comparing soil profile N2O concentration with surface flux under different farming practices

2024· dissertation· en· W7028329030 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMspace (University of Manitoba) · 2024
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLibraries and Information Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersResearch Manitoba
KeywordsCover cropNitrogenSoil horizonAgricultureSoil waterWater contentField experimentFlux (metallurgy)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Existing research has consistently demonstrated a significant increase in N2O emissions during the spring thaw period. However, understanding the precise influence of farming practices such as cover crops and enhanced efficiency nitrogen fertilizers (EENFs) on N2O dynamics—production, diffusion, consumption in the soil profile, and surface emissions—remains limited, particularly in clay soil in Manitoba. A two-year field study was conducted in 2022 and 2023 on clay soil at the TGAS-MAN research station in Manitoba to investigate the impact of different farming practices [cover crop and enhanced efficient nitrogen fertilizers (EENFs)] on soil profile N2O concentrations at 5, 15, 30 and 60 cm of soil profile in relation to surface flux. The research site was divided into four 4-hectare fields, each measuring 200 meters by 200 meters. Six modified silicone diffusive equilibrium samplers were installed in each field to collect soil profile gas samples from different depths. The micrometeorological method was used to measure N2O surface flux rates. The results indicated that growing winter rye as a cover crop significantly (p<0.01) decreased soil profile N2O concentrations across all depths from September to December. Compared to non-cover crop, the cover crop treatment decreased the median N2O concentrations at 5, 15, 30, and 60 cm. With the increasing temperature and soil moisture at spring–thaw, profile N2O concentrations at all depths increased significantly. In contrast, no significant difference was observed between the non-cover and cover crop treatments during spring–thaw. While different fertilizer sources did not significantly affect N2O concentrations, EENF demonstrated a capacity to reduce N2O concentration in the 5 cm depth but did not have a discernible effect at deeper depths during the growing season 2023. The lowest N2O concentrations were consistently observed at shallow depths (5 cm) throughout the study period, while peak N2O concentrations were observed at deeper soil depths (30-60 cm). The peak N2O concentration during spring–thaw 2022 and 2023 occurred at 30 cm of soil profile likely due to higher microbial activity, confirming that de novo production is the main mechanism driving N2O peak emission during spring–thaw.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMspace (University of Manitoba)Same topicLibraries and Information ServicesFrench-language works237,207