MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7042750179

Rebuilding the Fertility and Productivity of Eroded Knoll Soils

2021· other· en· W7042750179 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan) · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTopsoilSoil fertilitySoil waterProductivityErosionManureGrowing seasonInfiltration (HVAC)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historical erosion (water, wind, and tillage) of upper-slope knolls within hummocky fields have typically resulted in the translocation of native fertile topsoil to lower-slope positions, leaving the soils remaining at these higher landscape positions with low organic matter, poor fertility, along with reduced water infiltration and holding capacity. A three-year rotational field study was established to evaluate the productivity of spring wheat, field pea, and canola growing on two eroded knoll locations with and without nine different soil fertility treatments: side-banded mono-ammonium phosphate; side-banded zinc sulfate; side-banded copper sulfate; side-banded ZnSO4 + CuSO4; side banded MAP + ZnSO4 + CuSO4; composted solid cattle manure (SCM) broadcast and incorporated; broadcast and incorporated SCM followed by side-banded ZnSO4 + CuSO4; side-banded Zn-containing char; and historically eroded topsoil mechanically transplanted back onto the knoll from an adjacent depressional area. Based on the first growing season results, it appears that even under record-breaking dry growing season conditions, restoring eroded topsoil back to the eroded knoll landscape position is the most effective method of increasing spring wheat crop productivity. Positive responses of wheat and pea to MAP and Zn respectively, as well as trend towards benefit from SCM, indicate potential benefits from these amendments as well, albeit smaller than replacing the original topsoil lost by erosion.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.172
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan)→French-language works237,207→