MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Impacts of Alternative Manure Application Rates on Texas Animal Feeding Operations: A Macro Level Analysis<sup>1</sup>

2008· article· en· W1989036091 on OpenAlexaff
Edward Osei, Boxue Du, Asfaw Bekele, Larry M. Hauck, Ali Saleh, Alexander Tanter

Bibliographic record

VenueJAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsImperial Oil (Canada)
FundersEconomic Research ServiceNatural Resources Conservation ServiceIowa State UniversityU.S. Department of AgricultureU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsManureEnvironmental scienceAgricultureAgricultural scienceEconomic impact analysisManure managementAgricultural engineeringEngineeringAgronomyGeographyCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: An integrated economic and environmental modeling system was developed for evaluating agro‐environmental policies and practices implemented on large scales. The modeling system, the Comprehensive Economic and Environmental Optimization Tool‐Macro Modeling System (CEEOT‐MMS), integrates the Farm‐level Economic Model (FEM) and the Agricultural Policy Environmental eXtender (APEX) model, as well as national databases and clustering and aggregation algorithms. Using micro simulations of statistically derived representative farms and subsequent aggregation of farm‐level results, a wide range of agricultural best management practices can be investigated within CEEOT‐MMS. In the present study, CEEOT‐MMS was used to evaluate the economic and water quality impacts of nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) based manure application rates when implemented on all animal feeding operations in the State of Texas. Results of the study indicate that edge‐of‐field total P losses can be reduced by about 0.8 kg/ha/year or 14% when manure applications are calibrated to supply all of the recommended crop P requirements from manure total P sources only, when compared to manure applications at the recommended crop N agronomic rate. Corresponding economic impacts are projected to average a US$4,800 annual cost increase per farm. Results are also presented by ecological subregion, farm type, and farm size categories.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources AssociationSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207