Impact of Soil Characteristics and Weed Management Practices on Glyphosate and AMPA Persistence in Field Crops Soils from the St. Lawrence Lowlands (Quebec, Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use of glyphosate-based herbicides (GBHs) in industrial agriculture has intensified in the past decades, causing a growing concern about the occurrence and spatial distribution of glyphosate and its principal metabolite, aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), in the environment. In 2014, glyphosate and AMPA content was measured in 45 soils from the St. Lawrence Lowlands (Quebec, Canada) before seeding and at harvest in soybean field crops using various weed management practices with or without GBH applications. At the same time, a recent history of agricultural practices and soil conditions was compiled for the sampled sites. The results of the study show that 91% of the samples contained detectable amount of either glyphosate or AMPA, with maximum values of 0.47 mg·kg−1 and 1.16 mg·kg−1 for glyphosate and AMPA, respectively. Surprisingly, detectable amounts of AMPA were measured in fields not treated with GBHs in 2014, whereas traces of both glyphosate and AMPA were detected in organic field crops, highlighting the potential spreading and/or persistence of both compounds in the environment. Glyphosate content was significantly higher in clay soils rich in exchangeable cations, such as Mg2+, K+ and Ca2+, which can contribute to the retention of glyphosate in soil via complexation processes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".