ArticleEnvironmental monitoring and assessment2012
Geospatial approaches to characterizing agriculture in the Chincoteague Bay subbasin.
Article in Environmental monitoring and assessment, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Most agricultural information is reported by government sources on a state or county basis. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate use of geospatial data, the 2002 Agricultural Cropland Data Layer (CDL) for the mid-Atlantic region, to characterize agricultural, environmental, and other scientific parameters for the Chincoteague Bay subbasin using geographic information systems. This study demonstrated that agriculture can be characterized accurately on subbasin and subwatershed bases, thus complimenting various assessment technologies. Approximately 28% of the dry land of the subbasin was cropland. Field corn was the largest crop. Soybeans, either singly or double-cropped with wheat, were the second most predominant crop. Although the subbasin is relatively small, cropping practices in the northern part were different from those in the southern portion. Other crops, such as fresh vegetables and vegetables grown for processing, were less than 10% of the total cropland. A conservative approximation of the total pesticide usage in the subbasin in 2002 was over 277,000 lbs of active ingredients. Herbicides represented the most frequently used pesticides in the subbasin, both in number (17) and in total active ingredients (over 261,000 lbs). Ten insecticides predominated in the watershed, while only small quantities of three fungicides were used. Total pesticide usage and intensity were estimated using the CDL. Nutrient inputs to cropland from animal manure, chemical fertilizer, and atmospheric deposition were modeled at over 30 million pounds of nitrogen and over 7 million pounds of phosphorous. Crops under conservation tillage had the largest input of both nutrients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.