MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

MODELING EVAPOTRANSPIRATION FOR C4 and C3 CROPS IN THE WESTERN LAKE ERIE BASIN USING REMOTE SENSING DATA

2020· article· en· W3006063992 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Yahampath Anuruddha Marambe, Anita Šimić Milas

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsEvapotranspirationEnvironmental scienceMonocultureSurface runoffGrowing seasonCropAgronomyHydrology (agriculture)EcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Growing monoculture impacts not just soil properties and biodiversity but also local hydrology including evapotranspiration (ET). The Midwest region of the U.S. is known for its monoculture trend by growing and producing corn, which commonly replaces other crop types. In addition to large areas covered with corn, the photosynthetic adaptations of corn, being the C4 crop, affects ET differently than other C3 crops such as soybean, wheat, and alfalfa. This study aims to model and compare ET for C3 and C4 crops using remote sensing (Sentinel-2 data) and the Boreal Ecosystem Productivity Simulator (BEPS) model, modified to consider C3 and C4 crops. The study explores the ET rate trend for corn and soybean in an agriculture area situated in the Western Lake Erie Basin, where the balance between evapotranspiration, groundwater level, and surface runoff may play a role in agricultural runoff and Lake Erie’s algal blooms caused by runoff pollution. The results suggest that the monthly average ET rates for both soybean (C3) and corn (C4) reach its maximum at the mid-to-late growing season. However, the ET rate for corn is higher than for soybean in the early season (June) (ET = 121 mm month−1 for corn; ET = 105 mm month−1 for soybean), while the ET rate for soybean becomes higher than for corn soon after (July) and becomes considerably higher in August (ET = 181 mm month−1 for corn; ET = 218 mm month−1 for soybean). It is surmised that the higher ET rate for corn in the early growing season is due to nitrogen-based fertilizer commonly applied to corn parcels at that time, whereas soybean growth is based on biological nitrogen fixation.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score0.668

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œinternational archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences/International archives of the photogrammetry, remote sensing and spatial information sciences→Same topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics→French-language works237,207→