MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2884103110 · doi:10.3390/su10072522

Regionalized Terrestrial Ecotoxicity Assessment of Copper-Based Fungicides Applied in Viticulture

2018· article· en· W2884103110 on OpenAlexafffund
Ivan Viveros Santos, Cécile Bulle, Annie Levasseur, Louise Deschênes

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy metals in environment
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureUniversité du Québec à MontréalPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEcotoxicityEnvironmental scienceAgricultureDowny mildewGenetic algorithmEcologyAgronomyBiologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Life cycle assessment has been recognized as an important decision-making tool to improve the environmental performance of agricultural systems. Still, there are certain modelling issues related to the assessment of their impacts. The first is linked to the assessment of the metal terrestrial ecotoxicity impact, for which metal speciation in soil is disregarded. In fact, emissions of metals in agricultural systems contribute significantly to the ecotoxic impact, as do copper-based fungicides applied in viticulture to combat downy mildew. Another issue is linked to the ways in which the intrinsic geographical variability of agriculture resulting from the variation of management practices, soil properties, and climate is addressed. The aim of this study is to assess the spatial variability of the terrestrial ecotoxicity impact of copper-based fungicides applied in European vineyards, accounting for both geographical variability in terms of agricultural practice and copper speciation in soil. This first entails the development of regionalized characterization factors (CFs) for the copper used in viticulture and then the application of these CFs to a regionalized life-cycle inventory that considers different management practices, soil properties, and climates in different regions, namely Languedoc-Roussillon (France), Minho (Portugal), Tuscany (Italy), and Galicia (Spain). There are two modelling alternatives to determine metal speciation in terrestrial ecotoxicity: (a) empirical regression models; and (b) WHAM 6.0, the geochemical speciation model applied according to the soil properties of the Harmonized World Soil Database (HWSD). Both approaches were used to compute and compare regionalized CFs with each other and with current IMPACT 2002+ CF. The CFs were then aggregated at different spatial resolutions—global, Europe, country, and wine-growing region—to assess the uncertainty related to spatial variability at the different scales and applied in the regionalized case study. The global CF computed for copper terrestrial ecotoxicity is around 3.5 orders of magnitude lower than the one from IMPACT 2002+, demonstrating the impact of including metal speciation. For both methods, an increase in the spatial resolution of the CFs translated into a decrease in the spatial variability of the CFs. With the exception of the aggregated CF for Portugal (Minho) at the country level, all the aggregated CFs derived from empirical regression models are greater than the ones derived from the method based on WHAM 6.0 within a range of 0.2 to 1.2 orders of magnitude. Furthermore, CFs calculated with empirical regression models exhibited a greater spatial variability with respect to the CFs derived from WHAM 6.0. The ranking of the impact scores of the analyzed scenarios was mainly determined by the amount of copper applied in each wine-growing region. However, finer spatial resolutions led to an impact score with lower uncertainty.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.296
Teacher spread0.286 · 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

Citations25
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicHeavy metals in environmentFrench-language works237,207