MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3215108589 · doi:10.1007/s11356-021-16725-x

Nitrogen legacies in anthropogenic landscapes: a case study in the Mondego Basin in Portugal

2021· article· en· W3215108589 on OpenAlexaff
João Marques, Joy Liu, Maria da Conceição Cunha, K. J. Van Meter, N. B. Basu

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science and Pollution Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersFundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia
KeywordsWatershedStructural basinGroundwaterEnvironmental scienceSTREAMSDrainage basinHydrology (agriculture)Water qualityAgricultureGeographyEcologyGeologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Nitrogen (N) legacies have built up in anthropogenic landscapes over decades of agricultural intensification, and these legacies lead to time lags in water quality change measurable even beyond the moment of application of N. It is important to understand these legacies to quantify the relationship between N inputs and N concentrations in streams and implement best management practices for water quality improvement; however, little is known about the magnitude of legacies in various landscape elements like soils and groundwater. Here, we have used the ELEMeNT (Exploration of Long-tErM Nutrient Trajectories) model to explore the buildup and depletion of N legacies over a 216-year period, across the Mondego River Basin, a 6645-km 2 watershed in Portugal, where human interventions have considerably changed the characteristics of the basin to prevent floods and improve farming conditions in recent decades. The results show that the increase in the amount of inorganic fertilizer applied was the main driver for the anthropogenic N loads in the watershed from 1950 until the beginning of the 1990s. The N inputs have been decreasing since then, but N loads in the river did not document any decrease till the 1990s; after which there was a decline. This time lag between the N inputs to the watershed and the N loads in the river (about two decades) is a function of accumulation of N legacy.

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 score0.119
Threshold uncertainty score0.237

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science and Pollution ResearchSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207