MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409568771 · doi:10.53819/81018102t2478

Assessing the Effect of Mining Waste on the Quality of Soil; A Case of Eprocomi Mining Company in Gakenke District, Rwanda

2025· article· en· W4409568771 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agriculture · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East and Rwanda Conflicts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuality (philosophy)BusinessWaste managementEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The mining sector plays a crucial role in Rwanda’s economic growth, contributing significantly to employment, export revenues, and infrastructure growth. Even though, mining generates substantial economic benefits; the improper mining wastes management poses environmental challenges worldwide and in Rwanda as well. This study assesses the effect of mining wastes on soil quality focusing on Eprocomi Mining Company in Gakenke District from Northern Province of Rwanda. The research employed a combination of observations, field sampling, laboratory analysis, and analytical methods to evaluate key soil quality indicators of pH and heavy metals concentration. The tailings samples from mining wastes were collected in Eprocomi Mining concession for laboratory analysis to determine the extent of contamination and degradation. The collected soil samples needed to be pre-treated with air-drying, grinding, and sifting. A quantity of 3 g was weighed for each of the samples and pressed into the grinding machine under a 10 MPa pressure for 180 seconds and for testing of the samples, Niton XRF Analyzer instrument used. The findings indicate that mining activities have led to changes in soil pH and increase in concentrations of heavy metals such as lead (Pb), cadmium (Cd), and arsenic (As), which pose potential risks to soil fertility and agricultural productivity. According to Boyer and Pietrowiez's standards for interpreting soil pH, the pH of the soil varied from severely acidic to alkaline, with values ranging from 3.9 (the acid range) to 7.8 (the basic range). The concentration values for arsenic, lead and cadmium metals varies from 30 to 140 mg/kg, 92mg/kg to 200 mg/kg and 110 mg/kg to 321 mg/kg respectively which classify the area to have strongly polluted by Arsenic and moderately polluted by Chromium and Lead with reference to Germany soil regulation and Canadian standards measures. Based on the extent of environmental degradation with the influence of mining activities in the area, the study explored possible mitigation measures and recommendations to restore soil health and reduce the negative effects of mining operations on the environment and need to raise awareness about sustainable mining practices and foster collaboration between government, researchers and mining sector industry. Keywords: Environmental impact, Eprocomi Mining Company, GIS, Heavy metals, Mining wastes, Soil qualityTop of Form

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)0.000
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.320 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of AgricultureSame topicMiddle East and Rwanda ConflictsFrench-language works237,207