MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2888604768 · doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2018.07.016

A meta-analysis approach to examining the greenhouse gas implications of including dry peas (Pisum sativum L.) and lentils (Lens culinaris M.) in crop rotations in western Canada

2018· article· en· W2888604768 on OpenAlexaffabout
Susan MacWilliam, D. T. Parker, Christopher P. F. Marinangeli, Denis Trémorin

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural Systems · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsSaskatchewan Research Council (Canada)
FundersU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsSativumPisumCropGreenhouse gasAgronomyCrop rotationEnvironmental scienceCrop residueBiologyHorticultureAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study used a meta-analytic approach to systematically examine changes in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensities (i.e., carbon footprints) between pulse-containing and pulse-free crop rotations in western Canada. A systematic literature review was conducted to identify published literature relevant to the goal of the analysis and meta-analysis was conducted to determine statistically significant differences in GHG emissions between pulse-free and pulse-containing crop rotations. Four pulse-free reference rotations (cereal-cereal [CC]; oilseed-cereal [OC]; oilseed-oilseed [OO]; and cereal-oilseed [CO]) were compared to rotations where the first crop in each two-year sequence was replaced with either dry pea (Pisum sativum L.) or lentil (Lens culinaris M.). Two scenarios were considered. The first scenario investigated the effects of dry peas and lentils when synthetic nitrogen (N) applied to cereal and oilseed crops grown after pulses was not reduced (i.e., no change) (NN). The second scenario (NCR) investigated the effect of dry peas and lentils when synthetic N application rates were reduced to the maximum extent possible (i.e., credit) to maintain subsequent crop yields. Pooled analyses demonstrated that, in general, cereal and oilseed crops grown after a dry pea or lentil crop had similar or reduced GHG emissions compared to those grown after a cereal or oilseed. The GHG emissions from cereal and oilseed crops grown after dry peas and lentils were higher in NN (888–987 kg CO2e/ha; 286–598 kg CO2e/t) than in NCR (311–978 kg CO2e/ha; 116–598 kg CO2e/t), suggesting that emissions were reduced to a greater extent when pulse crops offset the N fertilizer requirements of a subsequent crop compared to when they were used to provide N to maximize crop yields. In two-year rotations, the inclusion of pulses reduced GHG emissions compared to all reference rotations in both NN (savings of 475–719 kg CO2e/ha over two years [area basis]; 164–496 kg CO2e/t over two years [yield basis]) and NCR (savings of 489–1185 kg CO2e/ha over two years [area basis]; 335–610 kg CO2e/t over two years [yield basis]), mostly as a result of reduced synthetic N requirements of the whole rotation. The results of the analysis are presented by crop for each pulse-free and pulse-containing cropping sequence for each scenario to allow for flexibility in comparing GHG emissions from various rotations.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.899
Threshold uncertainty score0.201

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.031
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.258
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
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

Citations43
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgricultural SystemsSame topicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactFrench-language works237,207