MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391541084 · doi:10.3390/hydrology11020022

Evaluation of BMPs in Flatland Watershed with Pumped Outlet

2024· article· en· W4391541084 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Rituraj Shukla, Ramesh Rudra, Prasad Daggupati, Colin Little, Alamgir Akhtar Khan, Pradeep Goel, Shiv O. Prasher

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and ParksToronto and Region Conservation AuthorityUniversity of Guelph
FundersMinistry of Agriculture, Food and Rural AffairsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOntario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs
KeywordsBuffer stripTillageWatershedEnvironmental scienceSoil and Water Assessment ToolSWAT modelHydrology (agriculture)Cover cropSoil conservationSurface runoffDrainage basinAgronomyAgroforestryEngineeringStreamflowAgricultureEcologyGeographyGeotechnical engineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The effectiveness of existing and potential best management practices (BMPs) to cropped lands in the Jeannette Creek watershed (Thames River basin, Ontario, Canada) in reducing P loads at its pumped outlets was assessed using the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT). Existing BMPs consisted of banded, incorporated, and variable phosphorus (P)-rate application, conservation tillage, cover crops, and vegetative buffer strips. Potential BMPs consisted of banded P application, no-till, and a cover crop following winter wheat. Two separately delineated sub-watersheds, J1 and J2, characterized by a flat topography and distinct pumped outlets, were selected for analysis. Despite challenges in delineation, the SWAT model was successfully set up to assess the impact of BMPs in reducing P loads in these sub-watersheds. Each BMP was systematically removed, and the resulting simulated P loads were compared with the baseline scenario. Compared to cover crops or vegetative buffer strips, the implementation of conservation tillage and no-till, along with altering the mode of P application, offered superior effectiveness in reducing the P load. On average, the annual reduction in total P (Ptot) loads under existing BMPs was 9.2% in J1 and 11.3% in J2, whereas, under potential BMPs, this reduction exceeded 60% in both watersheds.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.800
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrologySame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207