MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037602303 · doi:10.5539/jas.v5n5p140

The Impact of Soil Erosion on Agricultural Potential and Performance of Sheshegu Community Farmers in the Eastern Cape of South Africa

2013· article· en· W2037602303 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ikponmwosa David Ighodaro, François Lategan, Shehu Folaranmi Gbolahan Yusuf

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil erosion and sediment transport
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultureErosionCapePastureGeographyAgroforestryGrazingDeforestation (computer science)SocioeconomicsEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental protectionForestryAgronomyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soil erosion is one of the unresolved problems of rural agriculture. This study investigates the impact of soil erosion on the agricultural potential and performance of Sheshegu community farmers in the Eastern Cape of South Africa. Structured interview scheduled was used to collect data from 50 respondents using simple random sampling. Findings revealed that most (62%) respondents are male, who are above 46 years old (68%). Most of whom (72%) had education above grade 7. Further, the majority of them (50.8%) depend on social grants as sources of income. Most respondents confirmed that erosion occurred naturally through heavy rainfall and persistent drought while human causes that facilitated erosion include farming activities, deforestation and indiscriminate bush burning that expose soil to impact of rain drop. Respondents affirmed that erosion contributed to poor health of livestocks due to lack of pasture grass to feed on, loss of grazing land and poor bush regrowth. It is recommended that awareness on the negative effect of human causes of erosion should be created while simple technologies on soil erosion control should be pushed to the farmers. Finally, edict on bush burning should be enforced to check indiscriminate bush burning.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.859
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations55
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicSoil erosion and sediment transportFrench-language works237,207