Roots are the key for soil C restoration: A comparison of land management in the semiarid Argentinean Pampa
- Autores
- Frasier, Ileana; Barbero, Florencia Magali; Perez Brandan, Carolina; Gómez, María Florencia; Fernandez, Romina; Quiroga, Alberto Raul; Posse Beaulieu, Gabriela; Restovich, Silvina Beatriz; Meriles, José Manuel; Serri, Dannae Lilia; Figuerola, Eva Lucia Margarita; Noellemeyer, Elke; Vargas Gil, Silvina
- Año de publicación
- 2024
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- artículo
- Estado
- versión publicada
- Descripción
- The objective of the study was to elucidate the relationship between soil management and carbon (C) stocks, and to identify the factors that intervene in the processes that favor C sequestration. The study was carried out on a farm in the Argentinean semiarid pampas with four land management practices (2019–2021): natural grassland (NG), crop-pasture rotation (RO), soybean monoculture (S-S) and with cover crop (S-CC). Aerial and root biomass were quantified at cover crop termination and soybean flowering. In addition, residues on soil surface were determined two times a year. In all cases, C and N contents were quantified. On composite soil samples, soil organic C (SOC), particulate C (POC), microbial biomass C and N (MBC, MBN), and soluble C and N were determined at 0–0.1 m depth. Results showed that NG had the highest and the most stable aboveground (3807.1 kg residue-C ha-1) and belowground inputs between years (4965.8 kg root-C ha-1). Similar results were observed in RO treatment during the first year (4221.0 kg root-C ha-1) diminishing by 67% after plowing for the annual crop in the second year reaching similar root-C values than S-CC and S-S (721.7 kg ha-1). S-S presented the lowest aboveground (49%) and belowground inputs (77%) compared to NG. Cover crops (S-CC) contributed with 31% and 14% of extra residue-C and root-C, respectively, compared to S-S. MBC showed a non-linear response with increases in root-C, reaching maximum carrying capacity of 110.6 ± 4.3 kg MBC ha-1 with root-C inputs ≥ 2200 kg ha-1. Our results showed significant relationships between root-C and POC and SOC, while no relationships were found for aboveground residues. Increases in soluble N explained 86% of SOC variability. Both RO and S-CC reached the “4 per Mille” goal with an average annual SOC storage rate (ΔC) of 0.24 and 0.16 Mg ha-1 y-1, respectively, while S-S had SOC losses of 0.04 Mg ha-1yr-1.
Instituto de Suelos
Fil: Frasier, Ileana. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Suelos; Argentina
Fil: Barbero, Florencia Magali. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnología de los Alimentos; Argentina
Fil: Perez Brandan, Carolina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Salta; Argentina
Fil: Gómez, María Florencia. Secretaría de Agricultura Familiar, Campesina e Indígena; Argentina.
Fil: Fernández, Romina. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Agronomía; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Anguil; Argentina
Fil: Quiroga, Alberto Raul. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Anguil; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Agronomía; Argentina
Fil: Posse Beaulieu, Gabriela. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Clima y Agua; Argentina
Fil: Restovich, Silvina Beatriz. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Pergamino. Sección Laboratorio Suelos; Argentina
Fil: Meriles, José M. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnología de Los Alimentos; Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; Argentina
Fil: Serri, Dannae Lilia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Patología Vegetal; Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Unidad de Fitopatología y Modelización Agrícola (UFyMA); Argentina
Fil: Figuerola, Eva Lucia Margarita. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ingeniería Genética y Biología Molecular; Argentina
Fil: Noellemeyer, Elke. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Agronomía; Argentina
Fil: Vargas Gil, Silvina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Patología Vegetal; Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Unidad de Fitopatología y Modelización Agrícola (UFyMA); Argentina - Fuente
- Soil & Tillage Research 235 : 105918. (January 2024)
- Materia
-
Biomass
Carbon Sequestration
Soil Management
Biomasa
Secuestro de Carbono
Manejo del Suelo
Root C
Soil Microbial Biomass
Carbon Reserve
Raíz C
Biomasa Microbiana del Suelo
Gestión del Suelo
Reserva de Carbono
Región Pampeana Semiárida - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso restringido
- Condiciones de uso
- http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/
- Repositorio
.jpg)
- Institución
- Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
- OAI Identificador
- oai:localhost:20.500.12123/16597
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
| id |
INTADig_e84634c4dc303eebd1727b52f5753f42 |
|---|---|
| oai_identifier_str |
oai:localhost:20.500.12123/16597 |
| network_acronym_str |
INTADig |
| repository_id_str |
l |
| network_name_str |
INTA Digital (INTA) |
| spelling |
Roots are the key for soil C restoration: A comparison of land management in the semiarid Argentinean PampaFrasier, IleanaBarbero, Florencia MagaliPerez Brandan, CarolinaGómez, María FlorenciaFernandez, RominaQuiroga, Alberto RaulPosse Beaulieu, GabrielaRestovich, Silvina BeatrizMeriles, José ManuelSerri, Dannae LiliaFiguerola, Eva Lucia MargaritaNoellemeyer, ElkeVargas Gil, SilvinaBiomassCarbon SequestrationSoil ManagementBiomasaSecuestro de CarbonoManejo del SueloRoot CSoil Microbial BiomassCarbon ReserveRaíz CBiomasa Microbiana del SueloGestión del SueloReserva de CarbonoRegión Pampeana SemiáridaThe objective of the study was to elucidate the relationship between soil management and carbon (C) stocks, and to identify the factors that intervene in the processes that favor C sequestration. The study was carried out on a farm in the Argentinean semiarid pampas with four land management practices (2019–2021): natural grassland (NG), crop-pasture rotation (RO), soybean monoculture (S-S) and with cover crop (S-CC). Aerial and root biomass were quantified at cover crop termination and soybean flowering. In addition, residues on soil surface were determined two times a year. In all cases, C and N contents were quantified. On composite soil samples, soil organic C (SOC), particulate C (POC), microbial biomass C and N (MBC, MBN), and soluble C and N were determined at 0–0.1 m depth. Results showed that NG had the highest and the most stable aboveground (3807.1 kg residue-C ha-1) and belowground inputs between years (4965.8 kg root-C ha-1). Similar results were observed in RO treatment during the first year (4221.0 kg root-C ha-1) diminishing by 67% after plowing for the annual crop in the second year reaching similar root-C values than S-CC and S-S (721.7 kg ha-1). S-S presented the lowest aboveground (49%) and belowground inputs (77%) compared to NG. Cover crops (S-CC) contributed with 31% and 14% of extra residue-C and root-C, respectively, compared to S-S. MBC showed a non-linear response with increases in root-C, reaching maximum carrying capacity of 110.6 ± 4.3 kg MBC ha-1 with root-C inputs ≥ 2200 kg ha-1. Our results showed significant relationships between root-C and POC and SOC, while no relationships were found for aboveground residues. Increases in soluble N explained 86% of SOC variability. Both RO and S-CC reached the “4 per Mille” goal with an average annual SOC storage rate (ΔC) of 0.24 and 0.16 Mg ha-1 y-1, respectively, while S-S had SOC losses of 0.04 Mg ha-1yr-1.Instituto de SuelosFil: Frasier, Ileana. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Suelos; ArgentinaFil: Barbero, Florencia Magali. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnología de los Alimentos; ArgentinaFil: Perez Brandan, Carolina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Salta; ArgentinaFil: Gómez, María Florencia. Secretaría de Agricultura Familiar, Campesina e Indígena; Argentina.Fil: Fernández, Romina. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Agronomía; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Anguil; ArgentinaFil: Quiroga, Alberto Raul. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Anguil; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Agronomía; ArgentinaFil: Posse Beaulieu, Gabriela. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Clima y Agua; ArgentinaFil: Restovich, Silvina Beatriz. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Pergamino. Sección Laboratorio Suelos; ArgentinaFil: Meriles, José M. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnología de Los Alimentos; Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; ArgentinaFil: Serri, Dannae Lilia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Patología Vegetal; Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Unidad de Fitopatología y Modelización Agrícola (UFyMA); ArgentinaFil: Figuerola, Eva Lucia Margarita. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ingeniería Genética y Biología Molecular; ArgentinaFil: Noellemeyer, Elke. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Agronomía; ArgentinaFil: Vargas Gil, Silvina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Patología Vegetal; Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Unidad de Fitopatología y Modelización Agrícola (UFyMA); ArgentinaElsevier2024-02-14T14:09:59Z2024-02-14T14:09:59Z2024-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/16597https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S01671987230028540167-1987https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2023.105918Soil & Tillage Research 235 : 105918. (January 2024)reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariaenginfo:eu-repograntAgreement/INTA/2019-PD-E3-I062-001, Estrategias de producción que incrementen el secuestro de C en suelo para la mitigación del Cambio Climáticoinfo:eu-repograntAgreement/INTA/2019-PD-E3-I058-001, Emisiones (GEI) en los sistemas agropecuarios y forestales. Medidas de mitigacióninfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccesshttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0)2025-09-29T13:46:20Zoai:localhost:20.500.12123/16597instacron:INTAInstitucionalhttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/oai/requesttripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:l2025-09-29 13:46:20.649INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariafalse |
| dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Roots are the key for soil C restoration: A comparison of land management in the semiarid Argentinean Pampa |
| title |
Roots are the key for soil C restoration: A comparison of land management in the semiarid Argentinean Pampa |
| spellingShingle |
Roots are the key for soil C restoration: A comparison of land management in the semiarid Argentinean Pampa Frasier, Ileana Biomass Carbon Sequestration Soil Management Biomasa Secuestro de Carbono Manejo del Suelo Root C Soil Microbial Biomass Carbon Reserve Raíz C Biomasa Microbiana del Suelo Gestión del Suelo Reserva de Carbono Región Pampeana Semiárida |
| title_short |
Roots are the key for soil C restoration: A comparison of land management in the semiarid Argentinean Pampa |
| title_full |
Roots are the key for soil C restoration: A comparison of land management in the semiarid Argentinean Pampa |
| title_fullStr |
Roots are the key for soil C restoration: A comparison of land management in the semiarid Argentinean Pampa |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Roots are the key for soil C restoration: A comparison of land management in the semiarid Argentinean Pampa |
| title_sort |
Roots are the key for soil C restoration: A comparison of land management in the semiarid Argentinean Pampa |
| dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Frasier, Ileana Barbero, Florencia Magali Perez Brandan, Carolina Gómez, María Florencia Fernandez, Romina Quiroga, Alberto Raul Posse Beaulieu, Gabriela Restovich, Silvina Beatriz Meriles, José Manuel Serri, Dannae Lilia Figuerola, Eva Lucia Margarita Noellemeyer, Elke Vargas Gil, Silvina |
| author |
Frasier, Ileana |
| author_facet |
Frasier, Ileana Barbero, Florencia Magali Perez Brandan, Carolina Gómez, María Florencia Fernandez, Romina Quiroga, Alberto Raul Posse Beaulieu, Gabriela Restovich, Silvina Beatriz Meriles, José Manuel Serri, Dannae Lilia Figuerola, Eva Lucia Margarita Noellemeyer, Elke Vargas Gil, Silvina |
| author_role |
author |
| author2 |
Barbero, Florencia Magali Perez Brandan, Carolina Gómez, María Florencia Fernandez, Romina Quiroga, Alberto Raul Posse Beaulieu, Gabriela Restovich, Silvina Beatriz Meriles, José Manuel Serri, Dannae Lilia Figuerola, Eva Lucia Margarita Noellemeyer, Elke Vargas Gil, Silvina |
| author2_role |
author author author author author author author author author author author author |
| dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
Biomass Carbon Sequestration Soil Management Biomasa Secuestro de Carbono Manejo del Suelo Root C Soil Microbial Biomass Carbon Reserve Raíz C Biomasa Microbiana del Suelo Gestión del Suelo Reserva de Carbono Región Pampeana Semiárida |
| topic |
Biomass Carbon Sequestration Soil Management Biomasa Secuestro de Carbono Manejo del Suelo Root C Soil Microbial Biomass Carbon Reserve Raíz C Biomasa Microbiana del Suelo Gestión del Suelo Reserva de Carbono Región Pampeana Semiárida |
| dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
The objective of the study was to elucidate the relationship between soil management and carbon (C) stocks, and to identify the factors that intervene in the processes that favor C sequestration. The study was carried out on a farm in the Argentinean semiarid pampas with four land management practices (2019–2021): natural grassland (NG), crop-pasture rotation (RO), soybean monoculture (S-S) and with cover crop (S-CC). Aerial and root biomass were quantified at cover crop termination and soybean flowering. In addition, residues on soil surface were determined two times a year. In all cases, C and N contents were quantified. On composite soil samples, soil organic C (SOC), particulate C (POC), microbial biomass C and N (MBC, MBN), and soluble C and N were determined at 0–0.1 m depth. Results showed that NG had the highest and the most stable aboveground (3807.1 kg residue-C ha-1) and belowground inputs between years (4965.8 kg root-C ha-1). Similar results were observed in RO treatment during the first year (4221.0 kg root-C ha-1) diminishing by 67% after plowing for the annual crop in the second year reaching similar root-C values than S-CC and S-S (721.7 kg ha-1). S-S presented the lowest aboveground (49%) and belowground inputs (77%) compared to NG. Cover crops (S-CC) contributed with 31% and 14% of extra residue-C and root-C, respectively, compared to S-S. MBC showed a non-linear response with increases in root-C, reaching maximum carrying capacity of 110.6 ± 4.3 kg MBC ha-1 with root-C inputs ≥ 2200 kg ha-1. Our results showed significant relationships between root-C and POC and SOC, while no relationships were found for aboveground residues. Increases in soluble N explained 86% of SOC variability. Both RO and S-CC reached the “4 per Mille” goal with an average annual SOC storage rate (ΔC) of 0.24 and 0.16 Mg ha-1 y-1, respectively, while S-S had SOC losses of 0.04 Mg ha-1yr-1. Instituto de Suelos Fil: Frasier, Ileana. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Suelos; Argentina Fil: Barbero, Florencia Magali. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnología de los Alimentos; Argentina Fil: Perez Brandan, Carolina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Salta; Argentina Fil: Gómez, María Florencia. Secretaría de Agricultura Familiar, Campesina e Indígena; Argentina. Fil: Fernández, Romina. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Agronomía; Argentina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Anguil; Argentina Fil: Quiroga, Alberto Raul. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Anguil; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Agronomía; Argentina Fil: Posse Beaulieu, Gabriela. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Clima y Agua; Argentina Fil: Restovich, Silvina Beatriz. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Pergamino. Sección Laboratorio Suelos; Argentina Fil: Meriles, José M. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnología de Los Alimentos; Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto Multidisciplinario de Biología Vegetal; Argentina Fil: Serri, Dannae Lilia. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Patología Vegetal; Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Unidad de Fitopatología y Modelización Agrícola (UFyMA); Argentina Fil: Figuerola, Eva Lucia Margarita. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Instituto de Investigaciones en Ingeniería Genética y Biología Molecular; Argentina Fil: Noellemeyer, Elke. Universidad Nacional de La Pampa. Facultad de Agronomía; Argentina Fil: Vargas Gil, Silvina. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Instituto de Patología Vegetal; Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Unidad de Fitopatología y Modelización Agrícola (UFyMA); Argentina |
| description |
The objective of the study was to elucidate the relationship between soil management and carbon (C) stocks, and to identify the factors that intervene in the processes that favor C sequestration. The study was carried out on a farm in the Argentinean semiarid pampas with four land management practices (2019–2021): natural grassland (NG), crop-pasture rotation (RO), soybean monoculture (S-S) and with cover crop (S-CC). Aerial and root biomass were quantified at cover crop termination and soybean flowering. In addition, residues on soil surface were determined two times a year. In all cases, C and N contents were quantified. On composite soil samples, soil organic C (SOC), particulate C (POC), microbial biomass C and N (MBC, MBN), and soluble C and N were determined at 0–0.1 m depth. Results showed that NG had the highest and the most stable aboveground (3807.1 kg residue-C ha-1) and belowground inputs between years (4965.8 kg root-C ha-1). Similar results were observed in RO treatment during the first year (4221.0 kg root-C ha-1) diminishing by 67% after plowing for the annual crop in the second year reaching similar root-C values than S-CC and S-S (721.7 kg ha-1). S-S presented the lowest aboveground (49%) and belowground inputs (77%) compared to NG. Cover crops (S-CC) contributed with 31% and 14% of extra residue-C and root-C, respectively, compared to S-S. MBC showed a non-linear response with increases in root-C, reaching maximum carrying capacity of 110.6 ± 4.3 kg MBC ha-1 with root-C inputs ≥ 2200 kg ha-1. Our results showed significant relationships between root-C and POC and SOC, while no relationships were found for aboveground residues. Increases in soluble N explained 86% of SOC variability. Both RO and S-CC reached the “4 per Mille” goal with an average annual SOC storage rate (ΔC) of 0.24 and 0.16 Mg ha-1 y-1, respectively, while S-S had SOC losses of 0.04 Mg ha-1yr-1. |
| publishDate |
2024 |
| dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2024-02-14T14:09:59Z 2024-02-14T14:09:59Z 2024-01-01 |
| dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo |
| format |
article |
| status_str |
publishedVersion |
| dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/16597 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167198723002854 0167-1987 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2023.105918 |
| url |
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/16597 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167198723002854 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2023.105918 |
| identifier_str_mv |
0167-1987 |
| dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
| language |
eng |
| dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repograntAgreement/INTA/2019-PD-E3-I062-001, Estrategias de producción que incrementen el secuestro de C en suelo para la mitigación del Cambio Climático info:eu-repograntAgreement/INTA/2019-PD-E3-I058-001, Emisiones (GEI) en los sistemas agropecuarios y forestales. Medidas de mitigación |
| dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) |
| eu_rights_str_mv |
restrictedAccess |
| rights_invalid_str_mv |
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/ Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) |
| dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
| dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier |
| publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Elsevier |
| dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Soil & Tillage Research 235 : 105918. (January 2024) reponame:INTA Digital (INTA) instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria |
| reponame_str |
INTA Digital (INTA) |
| collection |
INTA Digital (INTA) |
| instname_str |
Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria |
| repository.name.fl_str_mv |
INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria |
| repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
tripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.ar |
| _version_ |
1844619184392110080 |
| score |
12.559606 |