MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208979792 · doi:10.1017/ssh.2021.24

Trawling the Ocean of Grass: Soil Nitrogen in Saskatchewan Agriculture, 1916–2001

2021· article· en· W3208979792 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laura Larsen

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Science History · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgricultureSoil fertilityProductivityEnvironmental scienceGeographyAgronomyNutrientLivestockBiomass (ecology)Arable landAgroforestryForestrySoil waterEcologyArchaeologyBiologyEconomicsSoil science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using a socioecological metabolism approach to analyze data from the Census of Agriculture, this article examines the underlying soil fertility of two case study areas in the Canadian province of Saskatchewan through the calculation of soil nitrogen balances. The Rural Municipalities of Wise Creek and Livingston are 300 miles apart and therefore have different topography, soil types, and rainfall levels, even though both are within the northern Great Plains. Over 85 years, from first settlement in the 1910s until the beginning of the twenty-first century, Wise Creek agriculture focused increasingly on livestock production while in Livingston farmers began to grow a greater variety of crops, most notably incorporating canola into rotations. Despite the differences between the two case studies, the pattern of soil nitrogen losses was remarkably similar, with biomass yields declining along with soil nitrogen. The addition of chemical nitrogen fertilizers since the 1960s did not produce yields matching historic highs, nor did a renewed focus on livestock. Wise Creek and Livingston showed two different responses to declining yields, but neither one ultimately provided a long-term solution to the problem of soil nutrient depletion and consequent productivity declines.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Science HistorySame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207