Examining the effect of soil organic carbon on major Canadian Prairie crop yields with predictive soil mapping
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Maintaining soil organic carbon (SOC) is critical for global food security as it is essential for soil functions that sustain crop yields. There has been an increase in predictive soil mapping, which when combined with extensive crop yield datasets, enables a better understanding of crop yield and SOC relationships. This study focused on updating maps of SOC content in Saskatchewan using recently digitized historical SOC datasets and predictive soil mapping, and using the maps to examine the relationship between SOC and crop yield. A database of 5014 SOC values was used to map SOC contents using a Random Forest model and a range of environmental covariates. The final SOC model had a R2 of 0.48, root mean square error of 0.98%, concordance correlation coefficient of 0.67, and a bias of 0.12%. The relationship between mapped SOC values and crop yield data, with 100,000–200,000 records depending on crop type, was then assessed using a linear mixed effects model after normalizing the data by rural municipality to remove broad‐scale climate effects. Overall, an increase in SOC by 1% led to an increase on average of 263 kg ha−1 for wheat (Triticum aestivum L.), 293 kg ha−1 for barley (Hordeum vulgare L.), 133 kg ha−1 for canola (Brassica napus L.), and 135 kg ha−1 for field peas (Pisum sativum L.). These results show that increasing SOC was associated with greater yields for four major crops in Saskatchewan, with the largest gains occurring when the initial SOC contents are lower.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".