Cost Efficient Tillage and Rotation Options for Mitigating GHG Emissions from Agriculture in Eastern Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The economic efficiency of cropping options to mitigate GHG emissions with agriculture in Eastern Canada was analyzed. Data on yield response to tillage (moldboard plow and chisel plow) and six corn based rotations were obtained from a 20-year field experiment in Ontario. Budgets were constructed for each cropping system while GHG emissions were measured for soil carbon and were estimated for nitrous oxide according to IPCC methodology. Complex crop rotations with legumes, such as corn-corn-soybeans-wheat with red clover underseeded, have higher net returns and substantially (more than 1 Mg ha-1 year-1) lower GHG emissions than continuous corn. Reduced tillage reduces GHG emissions due to lower input use but no sequestration effect could be found in the soil from tillage. Rotation had a much bigger effect on the mitigation potential of GHG emissions than tillage. However, opportunity costs of more than $200 per Mg CO2 eq ha-1 year-1 indicate the limits to increase the mitigation potential beyond the level of the economic best cropping system.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.003 | 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".