MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312544306 · doi:10.20517/cf.2022.16

The carbon footprint of beef cattle systems in the Southeast United States

2022· article· en· W4312544306 on OpenAlexaff
José Carlos Batista Dubeux, Liza Garcia, Luana M. D. Queiroz, Erick R. S. Santos, Kenneth T. Oduor, Igor L. Bretas

Bibliographic record

VenueCarbon Footprints · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon footprintBeef cattleGreenhouse gasLivestockEnvironmental scienceAgricultureAgroforestryForageEcological footprintBusinessAgricultural scienceEnvironmental protectionSustainabilityAgronomyAnimal scienceBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Grasslands in the Southeast United States (SE US) cover 15.8 million ha and most of this area is dedicated to beef production systems. This region holds 6.3 million beef cows and 12.1 million cattle, including calves. Beef cattle systems in the SE US are mostly cow-calf based, and most of the greenhouse gas emission from cattle occurs during this phase (cow-calf) because of their forage-based diet. This review assessed the carbon footprint (C footprint) of beef cattle systems in the SE US and indicates possible ways to reduce it. Major emissions in beef cattle systems come from livestock enteric fermentation and greenhouse gases from excreta. Cow-calf systems in the SE US are typically low input, although they use some industrial fertilizers, machinery, and fossil fuel, which adds to the C footprint of the sector. There are opportunities to reduce the beef C footprint in the SE US by adopting climate-smart practices, including preservation of natural ecosystems that have potentially high carbon sequestration, afforestation, integration of forage legumes (and reduction of nitrogen fertilizer), use of slow-release fertilizers, and dietary interventions. In fact, depending on the level of adoption of some of these practices, it is possible to establish climate-neutral beef at the farm gate in the SE US. Beef is a key food for humans and has large economic effects. Development of climate-smart beef could create opportunities for a niche market that recognizes the environmental footprint of agricultural production and could incentivize producers to pursue those systems.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCarbon FootprintsSame topicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactFrench-language works237,207