Contribution of apiculture in social and economic development of Nigeria
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is urgent need to rescue Nigerian economy from deluge of crisis it is been confronted with atthe present time. To achieve this, it is pivotal to explore various potentials available in the country to solve her problem. Therefore, this paper examines the potential of apiculture industry in social and economic development of the nation. Hive products such as beewax, propolis, pollen and royal jelly are known to have contributed largely to the economic development of advanced countries like China, Turkey, Mexico, Argentina, Hungary, Australia and Canada. While the practice provides job opportunities for people of all classes, it also boosts productivity of other agricultural crops. Honey from Nigeria will command higher demand and prices in the world market for its medicinal and antimicrobial qualities, thereby serving as a good foreign exchange commodity in international market. As part of its contribution to economic growth, apiculture is a good source of income for beekeepers, it involves the use of little land. It empowers small scale farmers and also does not damage the environment. The paper also stressed that apiculture is not only important for generating income, it also curbs against rural migration. Apiculture protects the environment and also an important non-timber forest product.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".