MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560606077 · doi:10.1139/cjss-2016-0081

GREENHOUSE GAS DYNAMICS IN A TREE-BASED INTERCROPPING SYSTEM COMPARED TO AN ORGANIC CONVENTIONAL SYSTEM

2016· article· en· W2560606077 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Mario Alberto Cuellar Castillo, Suzanne Allaire, Sébastien F. Lange, Robert L. Bradley, William F. J. Parsons, David Rivest, Alain Cogliastro

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping Systems
Canadian institutionsEspace pour la vieUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisUniversité Laval
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité Laval
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceIntercroppingGreenhouse gasPruningFertilizerSoil carbonField experimentAgronomySoil waterSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tree-based intercropping (TBI) system has been suggested as an alternative to conventional monocropping (CM) for decreasing overall greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, little is known about the advantages of TBI compared with organic CM system with low fertilizer inputs. This project compared CO2 and N2O dynamics in replicated TBI and CM in Saint-Paulin (QC, Canada), established about 12 yr prior to this study under organic production, with horse manure and pruning residues as soil amendments. An experimental field, using a complete randomized block design, was instrumented in both systems. A five-point sampling transect was established between tree rows in each of the six plots. Surface CO2 and N2O fluxes, CO2 and N2O soil concentrations, and other physicochemical properties were analyzed at 0.125 and 0.25 m depths over two growing seasons. CO2 and N2O concentrations in TBI soil were similar to or lower than in CM soil. Lower CO2 and N2O emissions suggest that TBI would decrease overall GHG mitigation, even when compared with organic production with low fertilizer inputs, in addition to its potential for carbon sequestration in wood and other advantages that are not discussed in this study.

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)0.001
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.554
Threshold uncertainty score0.968

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Soil ScienceSame topicAgronomic Practices and Intercropping SystemsFrench-language works237,207