Systems for the sustainable management of agricultural wastewaters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Agricultural enterprises produce wastewaters in large quantities and from multiple sources.These wastewaters offer relatively low levels of nutrients and conventional land spreading equipment cannot apply these at a sustainable rate of 1000m 3 /ha.Two new application technologies were developed to better use the nutrients of these wastewaters in a sustainable fashion, while also using the water applied to the crop and reducing the application costs: a modified surfaced irrigation method and a modified seepage field associated with an organic matter trap and septic tank.The project tested the performance of both systems to obtain the best management practices.The modified surface irrigation system performed with minimal environmental impact when using a plot larger than that required for infiltration and applying the wastewater on dry soils using recommended irrigation rates.The adapted surface irrigation technique reduced the land spreading costs from $3.50 to $1.00 Can m -3 .The modified seepage field coupled with a septic tank worked well for the disposal of milk house wastewaters when managing the sediments and milk fat.The modified seepage field had limited impact on groundwater quality, but provided crop nutrients and reduced the investment cost of a treatment system for milk house wastewaters $15 000 to $6 000 Ca., for a 60 cows dairy herd.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.003 |
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".