MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4288052963 · doi:10.1139/cjss-2022-0012

Modeling of total and active organic carbon dynamics in agricultural soil using digital soil mapping: a case study from Central Nova Scotia

2022· article· en· W4288052963 on OpenAlexafffundvenueabout
Siddhartho Shekhar Paul, Brandon Heung, Derek H. Lynch

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Soil Science · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil Geostatistics and Mapping
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaDalhousie University
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceSoil carbonTotal organic carbonCrop rotationSoil scienceVegetation (pathology)Hydrology (agriculture)Soil waterForestryCropGeographyEnvironmental chemistryGeologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Monitoring the changes in soil organic carbon (SOC) pools is critical for sustainable soil and agricultural management. This case study models total and active organic carbon dynamics (2015/2016 to 2019/2020) using digital soil mapping (DSM) techniques. Model predictors include topographic variables generated from light detection and ranging data; soil and vegetation indices derived from Landsat satellite images; and soil and crop inventory information from Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada to predict total organic carbon (TOC) and permanganate oxidizable carbon (POXc) at the 0–15 cm depth increment for a 37 km 2 study area in Truro, Nova Scotia. Quantile Regression Forest and stochastic Gradient Boosting Model were utilized for prediction. Although both models performed equally well for predicting TOC and POXc, the accuracy of TOC predictions (e.g., concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) = 0.67) was better than POXc predictions (e.g., CCC = 0.53). The Landsat variables and crop inventory were dominant predictors, while topographic variables across the relatively homogeneous terrain had relatively little influence. During the study period, changes in POXc were predicted across 98% of the study area, with a mean absolute loss of 5.77 (±11.48) mg/kg/year, and in TOC on 27% of the area, with a mean absolute loss of 0.15 (±0.09) g/kg/year. While the annual crop fields observed the highest loss of TOC and POXc, the decline in pasture–grassland–forage fields was relatively low. The study reinforced the effectiveness of DSM for modeling multiple SOC pools at the farm to landscape scales.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.526

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations22
Published2022
Admission routes4
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Soil ScienceSame topicSoil Geostatistics and MappingFrench-language works237,207