MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080165153 · doi:10.1071/ea04034

Predicting pasture and sheep production in the Victorian Mallee with the decision support tool, GrassGro

2006· article· en· W2080165153 on OpenAlexaff
Susan Robertson

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Experimental Agriculture · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPasture and Agricultural Systems
Canadian institutionsCarbon Engineering (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPastureLoamEnvironmental scienceTemperate climateAgronomyPerennial plantBiomass (ecology)GrazingRuminantSoil waterBiologyEcologySoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The GrassGro decision support tool was designed to quantify sheep and pasture production in response to management and climate variability in temperate Australia, and has been tested in temperate but not low-rainfall Australian conditions. Data from field experiments and from on-farm monitoring was used to test GrassGro predictions of annual and perennial pasture production, and sheep production at 4 locations throughout the Victorian Mallee, which is a low-rainfall area (275–375 mm annually). Predictions of long-term pasture production were then made. Predictions of the herbage biomass of annual pastures closely matched observed data for both a sandy loam (1991–2002 data) and a whole paddock (combining sandy loam and loam and sand) (2001–2002 data) soil type, at several locations across the Victorian Mallee. Linear regression between observed and simulated (April to September) data produced coefficients, significance and root mean square error of r2 = 0.81, P<0.001, 217 kg DM/ha, respectively, for sandy loam soil types and r2 = 0.94, P<0.001, 72 kg DM/ha, respectively, for whole paddock soil types. A series of simulations for individual years from 1970 to 2002 quantified the large impact of climate variability and demonstrated that seedbank and location, but not soil fertility, had a large influence on annual pasture production. However, GrassGro underestimated the production of the perennial pasture, lucerne (r2 = 0.2). GrassGro was also unable to adequately predict sheep production because it failed to take into account the sparse, clumpy structure of the low biomass pastures typical of this region. Methods to improve GrassGro were identified and included: (i) the need to adjust sheep intake from low biomass, sparse pastures, (ii) the ability to predict summer growing and autumn growing plant species, (iii) the ability to graze crop stubbles and (iv) refinements to the coefficients of equations used to model lucerne growth.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.205
Threshold uncertainty score0.408

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.216
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 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

Citations12
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of Experimental AgricultureSame topicPasture and Agricultural SystemsFrench-language works237,207