MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392643550 · doi:10.3390/ruminants4010010

Bibliometric Mapping of Academic Research Focusing on Animal Production and Climate Change in Association with Methane Emissions and Animal Productivity

2024· article· en· W4392643550 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Akeem Babatunde Sikiru, O. J. Makinde, Bossima Ivan Koura, Stephen Sunday Egena Acheneje, Maria N. T. Shipandeni, Oludayo Michael Akinsola

Bibliographic record

VenueRuminants · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProductivityClimate changeProduction (economics)Association (psychology)Environmental scienceMethaneNatural resource economicsAnimal productionGreenhouse gasAgricultural economicsEnvironmental resource managementEcologyEconomicsAnimal scienceBiologyPsychologyEconomic growth

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change is a pressing global challenge, and animal production is a major contributor to methane emissions. This study examines the academic landscape of research on CH4 emissions and animal productivity, with a focus on cattle, sheep, and goats. Using a bibliometric analysis of 2500 documents published between 1987 and 2023, the study finds that research on this topic has increased significantly over time, with a record high in 2022. The leading countries in terms of research output are the United States, China, Brazil, Canada, and Italy. The study identifies several key research themes, including the impact of CH4 emissions on animal productivity parameters, the development of mitigation strategies, and the assessment of trade-offs and synergies between CH4 emissions reduction and other sustainability goals. The study concludes by highlighting the importance of continued research on CH4 emissions and animal productivity to develop and implement effective mitigation strategies. This study has important implications for policymakers, researchers, and the livestock industry. Policymakers can use the findings to inform the development of policies and regulations that support the reduction of CH4 emissions from animal production. Researchers can use the findings to identify gaps in the existing knowledge base and to develop new research directions. The livestock industry can use the findings to develop more sustainable production practices. By working together, policymakers, researchers, and the livestock industry can develop and implement effective mitigation strategies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions, protect the environment, and support sustainable food production.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.784
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.2160.343
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.289 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRuminantsSame topicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactFrench-language works237,207