Evaluation of selected soil properties for indicating cattle activity at off-stream watering and river access sites in southern Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Miller, J. J., Curtis, T. W., Bremer, E., Chanasyk, D. S. and Willms, W. D. 2013. Evaluation of selected soil properties for indicating cattle activity at off-stream watering and river access sites in southern Alberta. Can. J. Soil Sci. 93: 343–358. Off-stream watering troughs may reduce surface water pollution by shifting nutrient distribution from natural watering sites along the river to around artificial water troughs some distance from the river. The objective of our study was to evaluate the suitability of nine soil properties for assessing the impacts of cattle activity adjacent to eight watering sites. Nine surface (0–5 cm) soil properties were evaluated along four 100-m transects at the five off-stream water troughs and three river access sites along the Lower Little Bow River in southern Alberta over 4 yr (2007–2010). The properties included P (total P, soil test P or STP), N (total N, NO3-N, NH4-N), total C, total C:total N ratio (TC:TN), chloride (Cl), and soil bulk density. Soil test P was significantly (P≤0.05) enriched at 65% of site-year comparisons, followed by total C (63%), NO3-N (55%), total P and TC:TN (50%). This suggested that these soil properties were relatively good indicators of cattle activity at the majority (>50%) of watering sites. Chloride was a valid indicator only in non-saline areas (100% of four non-saline sites). Total C and TC:TN ratios were not valid indicators in the calcareous soils at all sites because of possible confounding influence of inorganic C. Overall, we recommend Cl as an indicator of cattle activity at watering sites not affected by soil salinity and high natural Cl levels, and STP as the best overall indicator of cattle activity at off-stream watering sites and river access sites. Certain soil properties were also influenced by distance from watering site, stocking rate, precipitation, and age of water trough.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".