Structural equation models suggest that on-farm non-crop vegetation removal is not associated with improved food safety outcomes but is linked to impaired water quality
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract While growers have reported pressures to minimize wildlife intrusion into produce fields through non-crop vegetation (NCV) removal, NCV provides key ecosystem services. To model food safety and environmental tradeoffs associated with NCV removal, published and publicly available food safety and water quality data from the Northeastern USA were obtained. Because data on NCV removal are not widely available, forest-wetland cover was used as a proxy, consistent with previous studies. Structural equation models (SEMs) were used to quantify the effect of forest-wetland cover on (i) food safety outcomes (e.g., detecting pathogens in soil) and (ii) water quality (e.g., nutrient levels). Based on the SEMs, NCV was not associated with or had a protective effect on food safety outcomes (more NCV was associated with a reduced likelihood of pathogen detection). The probabilities of detecting Listeria spp. in soil (Effect Estimate [EE]=-0.17; P =0.005) and enterohemorrhagic Escherichia coli in stream samples (EE=-0.27; P< 0.001) were negatively associated with the amount of NCV surrounding the sampling site. Higher amounts of NCV were also associated with lower nutrient, salinity, and sediment levels and higher dissolved oxygen levels. Total phosphorous levels were negatively associated with the amount of NCV in the upstream watershed (EE=-0.27; P <0.001). Similar negative associations ( P<0 . 05 ) were observed for other physicochemical parameters, such as nitrate (EE=-0.38). Our findings suggest that NCV should not be considered an inherent produce safety risk or result in farm audit demerits. This study also provides a framework for evaluating environmental trade-offs associated with using specific preharvest food safety strategies. Importance Currently, on-farm food safety decisions are typically made independently of conservation considerations, often with detrimental impacts on agroecosystems. Co-managing agricultural environments to simultaneously meet conservation and food safety aims is complicated because farms are closely linked to surrounding environments, and management decisions can have unexpected environmental, economic, and food safety consequences. Thus, there is a need for research on the conservation and food safety trade-offs associated with implementing specific preharvest food safety practices. Understanding these trade-offs is critical for developing adaptive co-management strategies and ensuring the short and long-term safety, sustainability, and profitability of agricultural systems. This study quantifies tradeoffs and synergies between food safety and environmental aims, and outlines a framework for modeling trade-offs and synergies between management aims that can be used to support future co-management research.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,008 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,024 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».