MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2275890622

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF NUTRIENT MANAGEMENT PRACTICES FOR WATER QUALITY PROTECTION

2012· article· en· W2275890622 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Frederick Amon-Armah

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWastewater Treatment and Reuse
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater qualityBusinessQuality (philosophy)Natural resource economicsNutrientEconomic analysisEnvironmental planningEnvironmental scienceWater resource managementEnvironmental resource managementRisk analysis (engineering)EconomicsAgricultural economicsChemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of alternative cropping systems on farm net returns, and nitrate-N and sediment yields in Thomas Brook Watershed (TBW). The study involved integrated bio-physical and economic optimization modelling. Crop yield and nitrate-N pollution response functions were estimated and then used in trade-off analysis between farm returns and environmental quality improvement. Five crop rotation systems were evaluated for seven fertilizer levels under conventional tillage (CT) and no-till systems (NT). Nitrate-N leached, as well as estimated maximum economic rate of N (MERN) fertilizer level and marginal abatement costs depended on crop type, rotation system, and tillage type. The most cost effective cropping systems that met restrictions on Health Canada maximum limit on nitrate-N in water included corn-corn-corn-alfalfa-alfalfa under NT for corn-based cropping systems, potato-winter wheat-carrot-corn under CT for vegetable horticulture-based and potato-barley-winter wheat-potato-corn under NT for potato-based cropping systems.

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)0.000
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 score0.569
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.170 · 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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicWastewater Treatment and ReuseFrench-language works237,207