MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4388718595 · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-46936-w

Insect pollinators can unlock an annual monetary value of more than US $100 million from crop production in Rwanda

2023· article· en· W4388718595 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Rosita Endah epse Yocgo, Isaac Hitimana, Malachie Hakizimana, Eliud Birachi

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPlant and animal studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGlobal Affairs CanadaInternational Development Research CentreGovernment of Canada
KeywordsPollinatorInsectCropInsect repellentEcosystem servicesAgroforestryAgricultureBeneficial insectsBiologyPollinationAgronomyToxicologyEcologyEcosystemPollenBiological pest control

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Insect pollinators provide a natural ecosystem service to more than 80% of known flowering plants, many of which are part of our diet. However, their importance in Africa and an agriculture-dependent country like Rwanda has yet to receive attention. This encumbers policy formulation and investments in insect pollinators as a strategic agronomic input. Meanwhile, Rwanda cultivates crops that can benefit significantly from insect pollinators for superior agronomic outputs. To uncover this, we characterized the dependence of the crop production subsector on insect pollinators. Using the bioeconomic approach, we assessed the total economic value and the value due to insect pollinators of crops cultivated in Rwanda. We also evaluated the crop's production value per ton and whether production would meet consumption demands in the complete absence of insect pollinators. Using 71 representative crops currently grown in Rwanda, we found a direct dependency of 62% on insect pollinators. Of 32 representative crops used for economic valuation in two years (2014 and 2020), their total monetary value is estimated at $2.551 billion to $2.788 billion. Direct insect pollinator-dependent crops accounted for 20% (2014) to 18% (2020) of this value, with the share attributed to insect pollinators above $100 million. The sector's vulnerability to insect pollinators decreased from 7.3% in 2014 to 4.3% in 2020. The mean production value per ton of the direct insect pollinator-dependent crops was found to be higher in 2014 before declining in 2020. Using 21 representative crops from 2014 to 2020, we found that many direct insect pollinator-dependent crops will struggle to meet consumption demands in the complete absence of all suitable insect pollinators. Finally, we propose interventions and future research that could be undertaken. These insights are a critical first step to propel the government to act on insect pollination to support its food security agenda.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicPlant and animal studies→French-language works237,207→