Observed Long-Term Trends for Agroclimatic Conditions in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A set of agroclimatic indices representing Canadian climatic conditions for field crop production are analyzed for long-term trends during 1895–2007. The indices are categorized for three crop types: cool season, warm season, and overwintering. Results indicate a significant lengthening of the growing season due to a significantly earlier start and a significantly later end of the growing season. Significant positive trends are also observed for effective growing degree-days and crop heat units at most locations across the country. The occurrence of extremely low temperatures has become less frequent during the nongrowing season, implying a more favorable climate for overwinter survival. In addition, the total numbers of cool days, frost days, and killing-frost days within a growing season have a decreasing trend. This means that crops may also be less vulnerable to cold stress and injury during the growing season. Extreme daily precipitation amounts and 10-day precipitation totals during the growing season have been increasing. Significant trends associated with increased availability of water during the growing season are identified by the standardized precipitation index and seasonal water deficits. The benefit of the increased precipitation may have been offset by an upward trend in evaporative demand; however, this would depend on the amount of growth and productivity resulting from increased actual evapotranspiration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".