MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034537004 · doi:10.2134/jeq2008.0159

Are Current Phosphorus Risk Indicators Useful to Predict the Quality of Surface Waters in Southern Manitoba, Canada?

2009· article· en· W2034537004 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Esther Salvano, Don Flaten, Alain N. Rousseau, Renaud Quilbé

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Quality · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsInstitut National de la Recherche ScientifiqueUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceSurface runoffErosionPhosphorusWatershedHydrology (agriculture)HectareLand useWater qualityAgricultureRisk assessmentAgricultural landSoil waterWater resource managementGeographySoil scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many phosphorus (P) risk indicators have been developed to assess the risk of P loss from agricultural land to surface water. Most of these indicators are designed for land and climates where rainfall-induced erosion of particulate P from sloping landscapes is the main process of P transport. No indicators have been validated in the Canadian Prairies, where P losses are driven by snowmelt-driven runoff over nearly level landscapes and frozen soils. The objective of this project was to evaluate the relationship between water quality data for P from 14 watersheds and three existing P risk indicators for their potential use in the southern Manitoba prairie region of Canada. None of the indicators, including Birr and Mulla's P Index, a preliminary P risk indicator for Manitoba, and a preliminary version of Canada's National Indicator of Risk of Water Contamination by Phosphorus, was significantly correlated with mean concentrations of total P in water or P export per hectare. Although erosion risk was a significant factor influencing the value of these indexes, erosion risk was not correlated with either measure of P loss in these watersheds. Several other watershed characteristics, including average soil test P concentrations, livestock density, proportion of land in annual crops, and the land's inherent capability for agricultural production, were strongly correlated with P concentrations in water (r = 0.80***, r = 0.63**, 0.76***, and -0.70**, respectively). Therefore, these types of P risk indicators require modifications to estimate the risk of P loss under the soil, landscape, and climatic conditions of southern Manitoba.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.228 · 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 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

Citations38
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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