MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7029209026

Impact of Land Rolling on Wind-Eroded Sediment in Soybean Production

2021· other· en· W7029209026 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan) · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTelecommunications and Broadcasting Technologies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSedimentErosionAeolian processesHydrology (agriculture)ProductivitySoil textureSoil lossParticle-size distributionParticle (ecology)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wind-driven soil erosion is a major environmental issue that can lead to decreased soil productivity by eroding nutrient-rich fine soil particles away from agricultural lands. Many Manitoba soybean fields are routinely rolled shortly after planting. There are concerns that the practice of land rolling in soybean production may increase the potential for wind erosion through breakdown of soil aggregates into smaller unstable aggregates and reducing the roughness of the soil surface. Therefore, an experiment was conducted as an on-farm trial in eight different locations in in the Red River Valley of southern Manitoba during 2018 and 2019. The experimental trials were established with two treatments (rolled and non-rolled) arranged using a randomized complete block design. Sediment traps, specially designed and fabricated for this study, were used to collect wind-eroded sediment moving over the soil surface along the length of each treatment. The results of this study did not show that land rolling increased wind erosion risk by reducing soil surface roughness. With respect to the experimental evidence on amount of sediment collected by wind erosion samplers, the results show that there is a significant difference among samplers with collection opening at 5cm and 20cm, which indicates that most of the particles transported at 5 cm height. Detailed particle size distribution showed, the wind-eroded particles collected by the sediment traps with collection openings at 20 cm were slightly finer than the traps with openings at 5cm.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 designBench or experimental
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan)Same topicTelecommunications and Broadcasting TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207