MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889804329 · doi:10.3389/feart.2018.00135

Components of Phosphorus Loss From Agricultural Landscapes, and How to Incorporate Them Into Risk Assessment Tools

2018· article· en· W2889804329 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Keith Reid, Kimberly Schneider, Brian McConkey

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Earth Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceCladophoraSurface runoffEutrophicationPhosphorusManureAlgal bloomVegetation (pathology)AgricultureEnvironmental engineeringAlgaeNutrientEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phosphorus (P) loss to surface freshwater is a key driver of environmental degradation, including blooms of both harmful (e.g. microcystis) and nuisance (e.g. cladophora) algae, along with the development of hypoxic zones that could significantly impact fish habitat . Mitigating P losses from agricultural land will require a detailed understanding of the forms (particulate versus dissolved), sources (soil erosion, desorption of soil P, dissolved P from fertilizer or manure application, or release from frozen vegetation) and transport pathways (surface runoff, or subsurface runoff through tile drains). This paper describes each of these components in detail, and discusses how this can guide the adoption of appropriate beneficial management practices to effectively reduce P losses. Further, it describes how this component structure has been incorporated into the Canadian national Indicator of Risk of Water Contamination by Phosphorus (IROWC-P) as an example of a risk assessment tool.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.094

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0090.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0030.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.203
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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations77
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Earth ScienceSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207