MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2763748581 · doi:10.1177/0379572117708647

Rich Food Biodiversity Amid Low Consumption of Food Items in Kilosa District, Tanzania

2017· article· en· W2763748581 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueFood and Nutrition Bulletin · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicIndigenous Knowledge Systems and Agriculture
Canadian institutionsParks Canada
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsTanzaniaAgricultureBiodiversitySocioeconomicsFood securityDescriptive statisticsGeographyWet seasonDry seasonAgricultural biodiversityLivelihoodEnvironmental healthMedicineBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Indigenous foods, which contribute largely to the majority of the households' food basket in rural Tanzanian communities, have not been fully characterized or documented. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to document foods available and consumed in Kilosa District, Tanzania, in an attempt to promote, revive use, and build evidence for sustainable utilization of the rich local biodiversity. METHODS: Data were collected from 307 households in 3 agroecological zones in Kilosa District during the beginning of the rainy season (February-May) and immediately after harvest (September-October). A list of food items was generated, and 24-hour recall was performed. Descriptive statistics were calculated and a student t test statistic was used to compare the means of the Food Biodiversity Score between the agricultural seasons. RESULTS: A total of 183 edible food items were reported by households with more reported in the rainy season (n = 82) compared to harvest season (n = 64). The mean number of food items consumed per day during the rainy season was 4.7 (95% CI: 4.5-5.0) compared to 5.9 (95% CI: 5.7-6.1) during harvest season. About 50% of the households mentioned that wild edible foods were less accepted by household members. CONCLUSION: Despite the rich local food biodiversity, households relied on few food items which may be due to limited awareness and knowledge about the biodiversity of foods in the community. It is important to educate communities on the rich and affordable food base available locally to improve their food diversity, income, and nutritional status.

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.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.342
Threshold uncertainty score0.443

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 studies0.0010.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.177 · 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