Effects of Land-Use Practices on Woody Plant Cover Dynamics in Sahelian Agrosystems in Burkina Faso since the 1970s–1980s Droughts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 1970s–1980s droughts in the Sahel caused a significant degradation of land and plant cover. To cope with this situation, populations have developed several biophysical and social adaptation practices. Many of these are agroforestry practices and contribute to the maintenance of agrosystems. Unfortunately, they remain insufficiently documented and their contributions to the resilience of agrosystems insufficiently evaluated. Many authors widely link the regreening in the Sahel after droughts to the resumption of rainfall. This study examines the contribution of agroforestry practices to the improvement of woody plant cover in the North of Burkina Faso after the 1970s–1980s droughts. The examination of practices is carried out by integrating the rainfall, soil, and geomorphology variables. Landsat images are used to detect changes in woody plant cover: increasing, decreasing, and no-change in the Enhanced Vegetation Index. In addition, 230 field observations, coupled with interviews conducted on the different categories of change, have allowed to characterize the biophysical environment and identify land-use practices. The results show a variability of vegetation index explained to 9% (R2 = 0.09) by rainfall. However, Chi-Squared independence tests show a strong dependence between changes in woody plant cover and geomorphology (p = 0.0018 *), land use, land cover (p = 0.0001 *), and land-use practices (p = 0.0001 *). Our results show that rainfall alone is not enough to explain the dynamics of agrosystems’ woody plant cover. Agricultural and social practices related to the dynamics of farmer perceptions play a key role.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".