MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2013152643 · doi:10.1139/s07-026

Modeling the effect of agricultural best management practices on water quality under various climatic scenarios

2008· article· en· W2013152643 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
G. T. Parker, Ronald L. Droste, Kevin J. Kennedy

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Engineering and Science · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceWater qualityWatershedContext (archaeology)AgricultureBest practiceEnvironmental resource managementHydrology (agriculture)Water resource managementEcologyComputer scienceGeographyEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The South Nation (SN) watershed in Eastern Ontario was studied for improvements in surface water quality due to best management practices (BMPs). Contributions of non-point sources (NPS) to nutrient loadings are both significant and poorly defined in the region. The study used the dynamic Annualized Agricultural NPS (AnnAGNPS) model to run continuous annual simulations, coupled with a dynamic water-quality model for simulation of riverine water chemistry. The simulation case matrix focused on the potential of BMPs within the context of climate change. Results of the work were then analyzed to determine ecological intensity (severity), duration, and frequency (IDF) of violations to species survivability within the stream network. Best management practices were found to reduce water quality impacts but stream standards were not reached. Adjustment of fertilizer application rates (FAR) and vegetative filter strips (VFS) outperformed alternative BMPs in the model. Results suggest that agricultural activity within the watershed must be diminished to reach standards.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.539
Threshold uncertainty score0.231

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations21
Published2008
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Engineering and ScienceSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207