MaMeeFarm™ Research
Date: 3 October 2026
Publication Type: Research
Project: MaMeeFarm™
Abstract
A production system can remain physically recognizable while producing different results.
The same field can use the same area and equipment. The same machine can process the same material. The same photovoltaic system can retain the same installed capacity. The same water system can deliver the same nominal volume.
Yet performance can change.
One reason is that production systems do not operate independently of their environments.
Temperature, humidity, precipitation, water availability, salinity, solar radiation, wind, dust, soil conditions, and other environmental factors can alter biological processes, material properties, equipment behavior, resource availability, degradation, reliability, and conversion efficiency.
This creates an important problem for longitudinal production research.
When output changes while the physical system appears unchanged, the change should not automatically be attributed to the system itself. Conversely, stable output does not prove that environmental conditions had no effect. Additional water, energy, maintenance, cooling, labor, or operational intervention may have been required to preserve the same output.
This research examines how environmental conditions become part of the effective operating state of a production system. It distinguishes nominal system continuity from environmental continuity and examines immediate effects, cumulative exposure, thresholds, interactions, adaptation, reliability, measurement, and historical comparability.
The central finding is that the same production system should not automatically be expected to produce the same outcome under different environmental conditions.
System identity can remain stable while the conditions governing system performance change.
1. Research Question
How can changing environmental conditions alter the performance, reliability, and productive capacity of the same production system, and how can longitudinal records distinguish environmental effects from changes in inputs, operation, maintenance, measurement, and the system itself?
2. The Same System Does Not Mean the Same Operating Conditions
Consider a simplified production relationship:
System A + Input X → Output Y
Suppose the physical system remains unchanged and the same nominal quantity of Input X is supplied.
A comparison across time might assume that Output Y should remain similar.
But the actual relationship is closer to:
System + Inputs + Operating Conditions → Production Outcome
Operating conditions can include environmental variables that directly or indirectly affect the production process.
If those conditions change, the same nominal production system can operate differently.
This leads to a fundamental distinction:
same system configuration
does not necessarily mean
same effective operating conditions.
And therefore it does not necessarily imply:
same expected performance.
3. Environment Is Part of the Production Context
Environmental conditions are sometimes treated as background variables.
For many physical and biological production systems, they are more than background.
They influence the state in which production occurs.
Temperature affects biological activity, material properties, energy conversion, cooling requirements, and degradation.
Humidity can affect materials, storage, corrosion, biological processes, and manufacturing conditions.
Water availability influences biological production and cooling.
Water quality can change the effective value of the same water volume.
Solar radiation affects photovoltaic production and biological systems.
Dust can affect equipment and surfaces.
Wind can influence heat transfer, evaporation, structural loading, and some energy systems.
Environmental conditions therefore belong inside the analytical boundary whenever they materially influence production performance.
4. Environmental Effects Are System Specific
There is no universal environmental variable that explains production performance across all systems.
Agricultural production may respond strongly to:
- temperature;
- water;
- soil conditions;
- solar radiation;
- humidity;
- pests; and
- seasonal patterns.
Manufacturing may be sensitive to:
- temperature;
- humidity;
- dust;
- contamination; and
- material storage conditions.
Photovoltaic production responds to:
- solar irradiance;
- cell temperature;
- shading; and
- other operating conditions.
Water infrastructure may be affected by:
- temperature;
- sediment;
- water quality;
- flooding; or
- drought.
Equipment reliability may respond to:
- heat;
- moisture;
- corrosion;
- dust;
- icing; and
- environmental exposure.
The general principle is shared.
The mechanism is not.
Environmental analysis must therefore remain connected to the physical or biological system being studied.
5. Temperature Can Change Performance Without Changing the System
Temperature provides a clear example.
A production asset can remain physically the same while its performance changes with operating temperature.
Photovoltaic systems illustrate this directly.
PV modules are rated under standardized test conditions, but real operating conditions differ from those laboratory reference conditions.
As cell temperature changes, electrical performance can change according to the temperature characteristics of the module.
Installed capacity remains the same.
The module remains the same physical asset.
Yet output can differ.
This demonstrates a broader principle:
Nominal capacity describes a system under defined reference conditions.
It does not guarantee identical realized performance under all environmental conditions.
6. Biological Production Also Operates Within Temperature Ranges
Agricultural production provides another form of temperature dependence.
Plant growth and development occur within biological temperature ranges.
Responses can change as temperatures move away from favorable conditions.
Extreme heat can affect growth, reproductive processes, water demand, and yield.
The response is not necessarily linear.
A small temperature increase within a favorable range may have little effect.
The same increase near a physiological threshold may have a much larger effect.
This creates an important research problem.
Environmental change should not automatically be interpreted through simple linear assumptions.
The relationship may contain:
- optimum ranges;
- thresholds;
- nonlinear responses; and
- interactions with other environmental conditions.
7. Environmental Variables Interact
Production systems rarely experience one environmental variable at a time.
High temperature can coincide with low water availability.
High humidity can interact with temperature.
Wind can alter evaporation and cooling.
Water quality can interact with soil conditions.
Solar radiation can raise equipment temperature while simultaneously increasing available solar energy.
The production response may therefore reflect combined conditions rather than one isolated variable.
A field record stating:
temperature increased and output declined
does not establish temperature as the sole explanation.
The relevant operating environment may have changed along several dimensions simultaneously.
8. Water Quantity Does Not Fully Describe the Water Environment
Suppose a production system receives 1,000 liters of water during two periods.
The recorded quantity is identical.
But the productive environment may differ.
Water can vary in:
- salinity;
- temperature;
- dissolved substances;
- sediment;
- contamination; and
- other characteristics.
FAO guidance on irrigation water shows that salinity can reduce the ability of plants to extract water from the soil solution.
This creates an important distinction:
physical water supplied
and
water effectively available to the biological production process
are not necessarily identical concepts.
The same nominal volume can therefore contribute differently under different environmental conditions.
9. Soil Conditions Mediate Environmental Effects
Agricultural systems do not respond directly to weather alone.
Soil acts as an intermediary.
Rainfall affects soil water.
Temperature affects evaporation and biological activity.
Soil texture affects water retention and drainage.
Salinity influences water availability.
Nutrient availability interacts with moisture.
The same rainfall event can therefore produce different production consequences in different soils or under different antecedent conditions.
Even within the same field, environmental history can matter.
The relevant question is not merely:
How much rain occurred?
but also:
What production condition did that rainfall create?
10. Manufacturing Is Also Environmentally Sensitive
Environmental sensitivity is not limited to agriculture.
Research from the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology has examined how environmental temperature and humidity affect fused filament fabrication using polycarbonate.
Changes in environmental conditions were associated with differences in characteristics including geometry, porosity, and mechanical performance.
The production equipment can remain the same.
The material type can remain nominally the same.
The production method can remain the same.
Yet environmental conditions around the process can influence the resulting product.
This is an important cross system example because it demonstrates that environment can enter directly into the production mechanism even in controlled technological processes.
11. Environmental Conditions Can Change Material Behavior
Materials themselves can respond to environmental exposure.
Temperature can change expansion, stiffness, viscosity, electrical resistance, and other physical properties.
Humidity can change moisture content.
Ultraviolet exposure can contribute to degradation in susceptible materials.
Corrosive environments can alter metal condition.
Repeated heating and cooling can contribute to material stress.
The production system therefore does not interact with an environment using permanently fixed physical properties.
The environment can change the state of the materials from which the system and its inputs are made.
12. Immediate Effects and Cumulative Effects Must Be Separated
Environmental conditions can influence production across different time scales.
Immediate Effects
These occur during or shortly after exposure.
Examples can include:
- PV output changing with cell temperature;
- evaporation increasing during hot conditions;
- a manufacturing material behaving differently under different ambient temperature; or
- biological stress occurring during extreme heat.
Cumulative Effects
These develop through repeated or prolonged exposure.
Examples can include:
- corrosion;
- material aging;
- UV degradation;
- repeated thermal stress;
- soil salinity accumulation; or
- long term biological stress.
The distinction matters because the environment observed today may affect today’s production, future production, or both.
13. Historical Exposure Can Change the Present System
Two production assets may appear identical today.
They may have:
- the same model;
- the same nominal capacity;
- the same age; and
- the same current operating environment.
Yet their historical environmental exposure may differ.
One may have operated for years in high humidity.
Another may have operated in a dry environment.
One may have experienced repeated high temperature exposure.
Another may have remained within moderate conditions.
Their present physical condition can therefore differ even when their current configuration appears identical.
This creates another distinction:
same current configuration
does not necessarily mean
same accumulated physical condition.
Production history includes exposure history.
14. Environmental Conditions Can Affect Reliability
Environmental exposure can alter not only instantaneous output but the likelihood that equipment remains functional.
Heat can stress components.
Moisture can contribute to corrosion or electrical problems.
Dust can contaminate filters, moving parts, cooling surfaces, or optical surfaces.
Cold and icing can affect some equipment and infrastructure.
Environmental exposure may therefore contribute to deterioration or operating stress, which can affect component condition, failure behavior, availability, and ultimately production.
This connects environmental research directly with maintenance and reliability research.
15. Maintenance Requirements Can Change Even When Output Does Not
Suppose a production system continues delivering 100 units per day.
At first glance, performance appears unchanged.
But under harsher environmental conditions, the system may require:
- more frequent cleaning;
- more cooling;
- more lubrication;
- more component replacement;
- more inspection; or
- more repair.
Output remains 100.
The resource requirement needed to preserve that output has changed.
A production analysis based only on output would miss this transition.
Stable output can therefore coexist with increasing environmental burden.
16. Stable Output Can Hide Adaptation
Production systems and their operators can adapt.
During hotter conditions, cooling may increase.
During dry conditions, irrigation may increase.
During dusty conditions, cleaning may increase.
During poor water conditions, treatment may increase.
During seasonal stress, operating schedules may change.
The observed output may remain stable because intervention compensates for the environmental change.
This means:
stable output does not establish stable production conditions.
The system may be using additional resources to maintain the same result.
17. Environmental Stress Can Change Input Requirements
Suppose output remains constant but water use rises.
Or energy use rises.
Or labor intervention increases.
The system may be maintaining production at a higher input cost.
This creates another performance dimension.
Researchers should not examine only a direct relationship between environment and output.
Environmental change may first appear through changing input requirements while final output remains comparatively stable.
The environmental effect may therefore appear as changing resource intensity rather than changing final production.
18. Environmental Conditions Can Change Productive Capacity
Environmental effects can sometimes become large enough to reduce the maximum usable capacity of the system.
A machine may need to operate below nominal load to avoid overheating.
A biological system may be unable to convert additional inputs into output during severe stress.
A water constrained system may have physical equipment available but insufficient usable water to operate at intended capacity.
Installed or theoretical capacity can therefore differ from environmentally available capacity.
This leads to a useful distinction:
nominal capacity
versus
effective capacity under current operating conditions.
19. Environmental Effects Can Be Nonlinear
Production responses should not automatically be assumed to change proportionally with environmental variables.
A system may operate normally across a broad range.
Performance may then decline rapidly after a threshold.
For example:
- temperature may remain within acceptable limits until cooling capacity becomes insufficient;
- soil moisture may remain adequate until depletion crosses a critical level;
- salinity effects may become increasingly important as concentration rises; or
- wind may have little operational consequence until a structural or operating limit is reached.
Longitudinal records can help identify these relationships.
But enough observations across the relevant environmental range are required.
20. Thresholds Can Make Historical Averages Misleading
Suppose average monthly temperature changes only slightly.
That average may conceal several extreme days above a critical operating threshold.
Likewise, average rainfall can conceal:
- long dry intervals;
- intense rainfall events; or
- changes in distribution through time.
Production systems often respond to actual exposure patterns rather than long term averages alone.
Environmental records should therefore preserve temporal resolution appropriate to the mechanism being studied.
21. Extremes Can Matter More Than Means
Two years can have the same average temperature.
One year may remain close to the average.
Another may alternate between extreme heat and unusually cool periods.
Their production consequences can differ.
Similarly, two seasons can receive the same total rainfall.
One may receive regular rainfall.
Another may experience drought followed by intense storms.
Total quantity is equal.
Temporal distribution is not.
This mirrors a broader principle from production variability research:
average environmental conditions do not describe the full operating environment.
22. Duration of Exposure Matters
Environmental stress can depend on how long conditions persist.
A short temperature spike may have little consequence.
Several days of extreme heat may have a larger effect.
Brief high humidity may differ from months of moisture exposure.
A single saline irrigation event may differ from repeated accumulation.
For some research questions, magnitude, duration, frequency, and timing of exposure may therefore all be relevant.
One measurement may not describe the condition experienced by the production system.
23. Timing of Environmental Stress Matters
The same environmental event can have different consequences depending on when it occurs.
Biological production is especially sensitive to production stage.
Heat during one developmental stage may have different consequences from the same temperature during another.
Water shortage may matter differently across growth stages.
Manufacturing and equipment systems can also be timing sensitive.
High ambient temperature during peak operating load may create a different effect from the same temperature while equipment is idle.
Environmental exposure must therefore be interpreted in relation to operating state.
24. Environmental Variability Can Become Production Variability
If environmental conditions become more variable, production outcomes may also become more variable even when the physical production system remains unchanged.
This may appear as:
- wider output dispersion;
- more frequent low production events;
- greater resource use variability;
- more maintenance interventions; or
- less predictable capacity.
But production variability alone does not establish environmental causation.
Input quality, operating practice, equipment condition, measurement, and other factors may also change.
Environmental records provide one layer of evidence needed to investigate the relationship.
25. Controlled Environments Do Not Eliminate Environmental Effects
Some production systems actively control their environment.
Examples include:
- greenhouses;
- cold storage;
- climate controlled manufacturing;
- data centers;
- animal housing; and
- controlled process facilities.
Environmental control does not remove the environment from the production system.
It makes environmental management part of production.
If external conditions become more demanding, the control system may require more energy or operate closer to its limits.
Internal conditions may remain stable while the resources required to maintain them increase.
Again, stable production conditions can conceal increasing environmental burden.
26. Environment Can Affect Storage Before Production Begins
Environmental conditions can change inputs before they enter the production process.
Seed may lose viability under unsuitable storage.
Feed may change moisture condition.
Materials may absorb water.
Components may corrode.
Chemicals may degrade.
The production system may therefore receive an input that has already been altered by environmental exposure.
This connects environmental research with input quality research.
The environment can affect production indirectly by changing the characteristics of the inputs.
27. Environment Can Affect Production After Output Is Created
Production performance can also depend on what happens after physical output is produced.
Heat can affect storage.
Humidity can affect product condition.
Water exposure can damage materials.
Biological outputs can deteriorate.
A system may therefore achieve the same gross production quantity while experiencing different usable or saleable output.
Researchers should define the production outcome carefully.
Gross output and usable output are not always equivalent.
28. Environmental Change Can Alter the Meaning of Historical Comparisons
Suppose the same production system produces:
Year A: 100 units
Year B: 90 units
A simple comparison shows a 10 percent decline.
But suppose Year B experienced substantially different environmental conditions.
The historical comparison now contains changes in both time and environment.
The output difference remains real.
The explanation becomes more complex.
Researchers should distinguish:
observed production change
from
environment adjusted interpretation of production change.
The first is directly observed.
The second requires additional evidence and analytical assumptions.
29. Longitudinal Environmental Records Create Context
Repeated production records become more informative when environmental observations are preserved alongside them.
Researchers can examine whether:
- low output coincided with high temperature;
- maintenance increased during dusty periods;
- water use increased during dry periods;
- equipment failures clustered during particular conditions; or
- product quality changed with humidity.
These associations can identify plausible relationships.
But association remains distinct from causality.
The historical record creates research opportunities.
It does not automatically answer every causal question.
30. Environmental Change Plus Production Change Establishes Co Occurrence
Suppose temperature increased and output decreased.
The evidence establishes that both occurred during the relevant period.
It does not automatically establish:
temperature caused the output decline.
Other variables may also have changed.
Input quantity may differ.
Input quality may differ.
Maintenance may differ.
Equipment condition may differ.
Operating sequence may differ.
Measurement may differ.
The first evidentiary level is therefore:
documented environmental change + documented production change.
This establishes co occurrence.
31. A Supported Physical Mechanism Strengthens Interpretation
An environmental explanation becomes stronger when an appropriate physical or biological mechanism is also supported.
For example, a period of higher environmental temperature may coincide with higher equipment temperature, changed operating efficiency, and changed output.
In another system, increased water salinity may coincide with increased soil salinity, changes in plant stress indicators, and declining production.
Such evidence provides more support than simple temporal coincidence.
But competing explanations may still remain.
Mechanistic consistency strengthens attribution.
It does not automatically complete it.
32. Strong Causal Attribution Requires More Evidence
A stronger causal conclusion may require some combination of:
- controlled experiments;
- comparable untreated conditions;
- repeated longitudinal observations;
- statistical adjustment;
- physical mechanism evidence;
- environmental measurements;
- input records;
- maintenance records; and
- accounting for important competing explanations.
The exact standard depends on the research question.
Routine field records can contribute substantially.
But observational evidence should not be presented as experimental proof when it is not.
33. Measurement Location Matters
Environmental conditions can vary spatially.
Temperature measured several kilometers away may not equal the temperature experienced by the production asset.
Rainfall at one station may not represent another field.
Humidity inside a production facility can differ from outdoor humidity.
Water quality can differ between source and point of use.
Environmental evidence therefore has a spatial dimension.
Researchers should consider where the environmental condition was measured relative to the production system.
That relationship affects evidentiary strength.
34. Measurement Frequency Matters
Environmental variables can change rapidly.
One daily temperature measurement may miss the maximum temperature.
Monthly rainfall totals can hide individual storms.
Occasional water sampling can miss short term contamination.
A production event may occur between environmental observations.
The frequency of environmental measurement should therefore be appropriate to the process being investigated.
Otherwise, apparent absence of environmental change may reflect insufficient observation.
35. Changing Sensors Can Create Artificial Environmental Trends
Long term environmental records can be affected by measurement change.
Sensors may be replaced.
Locations may move.
Calibration may change.
Observation frequency may increase.
Automated systems may replace manual readings.
An apparent environmental transition can therefore partly reflect the observation system.
Historical research should preserve sufficient measurement context to determine whether environmental values remain comparable through time.
36. Missing Environmental Records Preserve Uncertainty
Suppose production declined during a period for which temperature records are missing.
Researchers should not automatically assume that temperature was normal.
Nor should they assume it was extreme.
The correct status is:
environmental condition unknown for the missing period.
Production evidence remains valid.
Environmental attribution becomes weaker.
Missingness should remain part of the uncertainty rather than being silently filled with an assumed condition.
37. Environmental Exposure Can Change Maintenance History
Maintenance records can provide indirect evidence that operating conditions changed.
For example, researchers may observe:
- more frequent filter cleaning;
- increased cooling maintenance;
- more corrosion treatment;
- more lubrication; or
- increased replacement of environmentally exposed components.
These records can support investigation of environmental burden.
But they remain indirect.
Maintenance activity may change for other reasons.
Direct environmental measurements provide stronger evidence when environmental attribution is the research question.
38. Adaptation Is Part of Production History
Suppose operators respond to heat by changing working hours.
Or respond to drought by increasing irrigation.
Or respond to dust by cleaning equipment more frequently.
The physical assets may remain the same.
But the operating conditions and production response have changed.
If adaptation is omitted from historical interpretation, researchers may underestimate the environmental effect.
Output stability may actually reflect successful intervention.
Adaptation is therefore part of the production history rather than evidence that environmental conditions were irrelevant.
39. Performance Should Be Evaluated Across More Than Output
Environmental effects can appear in several dimensions.
Researchers may need to examine:
- output quantity;
- output quality;
- resource consumption;
- energy use;
- water use;
- maintenance burden;
- downtime;
- failure frequency;
- production variability;
- labor requirements;
- effective capacity; and
- recovery time.
A production system can preserve output while deteriorating on another dimension.
Performance is therefore broader than final production quantity.
40. Research Considerations for Environmental and Production Comparison
Environmental analysis across time requires attention to several forms of comparability.
System identity matters.
A change attributed to environment should not silently include an unrecognized change in equipment, production area, biological system, capacity, or major configuration.
Environmental variables should relate to the production mechanism being studied.
Temperature, humidity, water quality, irradiance, soil conditions, dust, and other variables do not have universal significance across all production systems.
Exposure has temporal structure.
Magnitude alone may be insufficient. Duration, frequency, timing, accumulated exposure, and extreme events can affect production differently.
Inputs and operating interventions can change simultaneously.
Changes in water, energy, material quality, maintenance, workload, cooling, irrigation, cleaning, or other interventions can alter the observed production response.
Performance can change across several dimensions.
Output quantity may remain stable while resource requirements, maintenance burden, variability, availability, product quality, or effective capacity change.
Measurement comparability matters.
Sensor replacement, changed location, calibration, observation frequency, or altered production definitions can create apparent historical change.
Physical or biological mechanisms strengthen interpretation.
An observed environmental change becomes more informative when evidence also supports a mechanism capable of affecting the production outcome being studied.
Competing explanations should remain visible.
Input changes, system deterioration, maintenance, adaptation, operating practice, measurement, and configuration can influence the same observed outcome.
Association remains distinct from causality.
Environmental and production changes occurring together establish co occurrence. Stronger attribution requires additional evidence appropriate to the research question.
These considerations do not constitute a universal environmental performance model.
They identify common evidentiary issues that arise when environmental and production observations are compared through time.
41. What Longitudinal Records Can Establish
With sufficiently consistent documentation, field records may establish that:
- environmental conditions changed;
- production changed;
- resource requirements changed;
- maintenance burden changed;
- failures became more frequent;
- production variability changed;
- environmental and production changes occurred during the same periods; or
- a production system required increasing intervention to maintain output.
These are meaningful findings even when causality remains unresolved.
42. What Longitudinal Records Cannot Establish Alone
Routine observational records generally cannot establish automatically:
- that environmental change caused an output change;
- that stable output means the environment had no effect;
- that the same physical system remained in the same physical condition;
- that a single environmental variable explains a multivariable production response;
- that correlation establishes mechanism; or
- that historical exposure had no effect merely because current configuration is unchanged.
These conclusions require additional evidence.
43. Research Implications
Environmental conditions should not be treated as an external footnote to production history.
They can influence:
- the effective value of inputs;
- the physical condition of assets;
- the efficiency of conversion;
- the reliability of equipment;
- the availability of productive capacity;
- the resources required to preserve output; and
- the condition of output after production.
This means that a longitudinal production archive becomes substantially more informative when relevant environmental context is available.
The same machine can behave differently.
The same field can produce differently.
The same installed capacity can generate differently.
The same water quantity can function differently.
The same production output can require different levels of intervention.
Environmental history provides part of the context for understanding why apparently unchanged systems do not necessarily behave the same way through time.
44. Limitations
Environmental effects are highly system specific.
Variables relevant to agriculture are not identical to those relevant to manufacturing, energy, water systems, storage, or mechanical equipment.
Environmental measurements may be spatially distant from the production system.
Observation frequency may be insufficient.
Several environmental variables may change simultaneously.
Production systems may adapt.
Input characteristics may change with environmental exposure.
Maintenance may mask deterioration.
Long term environmental effects may involve lag and cumulative exposure.
Observational associations also remain vulnerable to confounding.
This research therefore does not propose a universal environmental performance model.
Its purpose is to establish why environmental continuity cannot be assumed merely because the production system appears physically unchanged.
45. Research Conclusion
A production system never operates in isolation from its physical environment.
The same equipment can experience different thermal conditions.
The same field can experience different water and temperature regimes.
The same photovoltaic capacity can operate under different irradiance and cell temperatures.
The same material can behave differently under different humidity or temperature.
The same production output can require different levels of energy, water, maintenance, or intervention to sustain.
For longitudinal research, this creates a critical distinction:
system continuity is not environmental continuity.
And environmental continuity cannot be inferred from system identity.
When production is compared through time, environmental conditions form part of the context in which the observed system operated.
Differences in magnitude, duration, timing, frequency, and accumulated exposure can matter.
So can changes in inputs, maintenance, adaptation, measurement, workload, and physical condition.
Environmental and production changes occurring during the same period can support investigation of their relationship.
Evidence of an appropriate physical or biological mechanism can strengthen that interpretation.
But causal attribution should remain aligned with the strength of the available evidence.
This leads to a broader principle:
The same production system should not automatically be expected to produce the same result when the conditions governing its operation have changed.
But the reverse is equally important.
The same production result does not establish that environmental change had no effect.
A system may consume more resources.
It may require more maintenance.
Operators may intervene more frequently.
Available capacity may decline while output is protected.
Environmental stress may accumulate without immediate production loss.
Production history therefore becomes more meaningful when it preserves not only what the system produced, but the conditions under which production occurred.
That context allows later researchers to distinguish between apparent continuity in output and continuity in the conditions, resources, and physical state supporting that output.
References
Backlund, P., Janetos, A., & Schimel, D. (2008). The Effects of Climate Change on Agriculture, Land Resources, Water Resources, and Biodiversity in the United States. Synthesis and Assessment Product 4.3. U.S. Climate Change Science Program.
Ayers, R. S., & Westcot, D. W. (1985). Water Quality for Agriculture. FAO Irrigation and Drainage Paper 29 Rev. 1. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Fang, L., Yan, Y., Agarwal, O., Yao, S., Seppala, J. E., & Kang, S. H. (2020). Effects of Environmental Temperature and Humidity on the Geometry and Strength of Polycarbonate Specimens Prepared by Fused Filament Fabrication. Materials.
Barabadi, A., Barabady, J., & Markeset, T. (2011). A methodology for throughput capacity analysis of a production facility considering environment condition. Reliability Engineering & System Safety, 96(12), 1637–1646. DOI: 10.1016/j.ress.2011.09.001.
Wilkinson, M. D., et al. (2016). The FAIR Guiding Principles for Scientific Data Management and Stewardship. Scientific Data, 3, 160018. DOI: 10.1038/sdata.2016.18.