MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2175299554 · doi:10.4141/cjss10002

Agricultural phosphorus balance trends in Ontario, Michigan and Ohio

2011· article· en· W2175299554 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Tom Bruulsema, R. W. Mullen, I. P. O’Halloran, D. D. Warncke

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultureSurface runoffEnvironmental scienceManureWater balanceProductivityLivestockPhosphorusCropSoil waterWater qualityDrainageSustainabilityAgricultural economicsHydrology (agriculture)AgronomyGeographyForestryEcologyEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bruulsema, T. W., Mullen, R. W., O'Halloran, I. P. and Warncke, D. D. 2011. Agricultural phosphorus balance trends in Ontario, Michigan and Ohio. Can. J. Soil Sci. 91: 437–442. Agriculture is one of the sources of phosphorus (P) that feeds into Lake Erie, impacting water quality. A substantial proportion of the agriculture in Ontario, Michigan and Ohio falls in the Lake Erie drainage basin. We examine trends in the balance of the major inputs and outputs of P to the soils of this region. Only a few decades ago, recommended rates of P application for optimum crop nutrition amounted to considerably more P than crops removed. In recent years, actual P applications have come much closer to balancing removals, while crop yields have increased. This trend has positive implications for both crop productivity and water quality. The P balance serves as an appropriate performance indicator for P management reflecting both economic and environmental aspects of sustainability. Depending on assumptions regarding the recoverability of manure and the current implementation of reduced-P feeding strategies in the livestock industry, estimates of the P balance for the region in 2008 range from a surplus equivalent to 1% of crop removal to a deficit amounting to 23% of the amount of P removed by crops.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.050
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.173
Teacher spread0.162 · 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 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

Citations18
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Soil ScienceSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207