MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944950833 · doi:10.1016/j.sciaf.2019.e00088

Assessing greenhouse gas emissions from outdoor cattle sleeping areas in Cameroon

2019· article· en· W2944950833 on OpenAlexaff
Ngwa Martin Ngwabie, Divine Ngwa, Chanceline Njuasu, Theodore Chenwi, Fabrice L. Yengong, Andrew VanderZaag

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific African · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicOdor and Emission Control Technologies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasEnvironmental scienceManureNitrous oxideMethanePastureManure managementCarbon dioxideEnvironmental engineeringAgronomyChemistryEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cattle production is an important source of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions which affects the environment. While emissions have mostly been quantified from barns and manure storage facilities, little information is available on emissions from outdoor sleeping areas, especially in Africa. This project was carried out in two beef cattle farms (Banshe and Menteh) in Cameroon, with the aim of quantifying GHG emissions from the outdoor sleeping areas. The sleeping areas were fenced with planks and the floor was bare soil covered mainly with cattle manure. Gas emission rates were measured when the cattle were on pasture using 2 non-steady state flux chambers during the wet season for 1 week in each farm. Manure dry matter, determined using method 1648 of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, was in the range of 28–38% while the volatile solid content was in the range of 41–57%. Emission hotspots and hot moments were observed with large variations in time and location. The methane (CH4) emissions were 4.04 ± 4.3 and 1.85 ± 1.7 mg m−2 min−1 in Banshe and Menteh, respectively. The nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions were 0.008 ± 0.02 and 0.049 ± 0.06 mg m−2 min−1 in Banshe and Menteh, respectively. The sleeping area with high CH4 emissions was associated with low N2O emissions and vice versa. The carbon dioxide (CO2) to CH4 emission ratios were high; ∼7 for Banshe and ∼15 for Menteh, indicating more aerobic conditions. The total GHG (CH4 + N2O) emission rates were 139.7 and 77.5 mg CO2e m−2 min−1 in Banshe and Menteh, respectively. This indicated that CH4 contributed 98 and 81% of the total GHG in Banshe and Menteh, respectively. This shows that mitigation strategies should be geared more towards CH4 in the sleeping areas in this study during the wet season. The GHG emission factors estimated in this research were the first of its kind in Cameroon, and can be used as a basis for planning management practices that mitigate emissions.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.054
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific AfricanSame topicOdor and Emission Control TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207