MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042617552 · doi:10.5539/jas.v12n8p106

Analysis of Spatiotemporal Features of Cassava Evapotranspiration in Benin Using Integrated FAO-56 Method and Terra/MODIS Data

2020· article· en· W3042617552 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Patrice Koyo, Jichao Hu, Martial Amou

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Land Suitability Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsEvapotranspirationNormalized Difference Vegetation IndexCrop coefficientLinear regressionTrend analysisVegetation IndexVegetation (pathology)GeographyHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceCorrelation coefficientLeaf area indexForestryCropPhysical geographyMathematicsAgronomyStatisticsGeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study analyzed the temporal and spatial features of cassava evapotranspiration from 1985 to 2015 in Benin using linear regression, Mann-Kendall trend test, Sen’s slope estimator, and interpolation. The study used basic meteorological data from the Met office of Benin and the Terra/MODIS vegetation index. The estimated crop coefficients (Kc) from FAO and NDVI have shown a strong and positive linear relationship with a correlation coefficient of r = 0.968, while NDVI-Kc presented values slightly lower than FAO-Kc. The rates of crop evapotranspiration (ETc) varied from 1.23 to 7.63 mm/day and 2.92 mm/day on average. At the local level, there were significant upward trends in the seasonal ETc for stations located in the bimodal rainfall pattern area (Cotonou, Bohicon, and Save) and non-significant for stations in the unimodal rainfall pattern area (Kandi, Parakou, and Natitingou). At the country level, both methods revealed a non-significant positive trend in cassava evapotranspiration in the study area while showing a strong and positive linear relationship in variations throughout the growing season, r = 0.956. Cassava’s growth in Benin may encounter in the future the risk of water deficit.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.436
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural ScienceSame topicSoil and Land Suitability AnalysisFrench-language works237,207