Integrating watershed and ecosystem service models to assess best management practice efficiency: guidelines for Lake Erie managers and watershed modellers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lake Erie is the shallowest and most biologically productive system of the Great Lakes, surrounded by large urban, industrial, and agricultural areas. This combination prompted extensive efforts to promote best management practices (BMPs) to mitigate non-point source pollution in Lake Erie’s watershed. Recent technical and conceptual advancements caution that significant variability exists in the BMP efficiency to reduce the severity of runoff and nutrient concentrations due to differences in implementation, the dependence of operational performance on local soil and climatic conditions, storm events and seasonality, and declining performance over time owing to imperfect maintenance. Given the uncertainty surrounding the design and efficiency of BMPs in abating non-point source pollution, our primary objective is to review the critical strengths and potential weaknesses of nine agricultural BMPs promoted for use in the Lake Erie watershed. We examine the capacity of the current generation of watershed process-based models to recreate possible BMP-mediated changes in the water and nutrient cycles. After reviewing modelling strategies (dynamic, external forcing, and empirical) to recreate non-linear watershed responses and feedback loops to BMP efficiency, our study recommends adopting dynamic representations of the interplay among key mechanisms, like soil moisture, water table, nutrient availability, plant uptake, and subsequent growth. Notwithstanding the increased sophistication of complex mathematical models, their learning capacity is usually compromised by the coarse resolution of environmental data and limited empirical knowledge to accurately parameterize environmental properties and partially understood biogeochemical processes. Moreover, BMPs may differentially affect the provisions of an ecosystem (e.g., a BMP may amplify one ecosystem service while dampening another). In this context, we highlight the expression of the value of ecosystem services in monetary and non-monetary terms as a critical information piece when considering trade-offs among costly and diverse policy decisions. Our study also examines the degree to which different types of valuation methods, socioeconomic models, and data have been operationalized in Lake Erie. Consistent with the Integrated Watershed Management framework, we advocate the adoption of a rigorous mass-balance approach to assess the impact of BMPs on nutrient cycles, as well as the integration of the projected environmental improvements with terrestrial ecosystem services, beneficial use impairments, and aquatic ecosystem services. The proposed strategy has the potential to improve the decision-making process by identifying cost-effective management actions and balancing different goods and services provided by the agroecosystems at different time scales.
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 | 0.043 | 0.115 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.002 |
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".