Estimation of in-canopy ammonia sources and sinks in a fertilized Zea mays field.

An analytical model was developed to describe in-canopy vertical distribution of ammonia (NH(3)) sources and sinks and vertical fluxes in a fertilized agricultural setting using measured in-canopy mean NH(3) concentration and wind speed profiles. This model was applied to quantify in-canopy air-surface exchange rates and above-canopy NH(3) fluxes in a fertilized corn (Zea mays) field. Modeled air-canopy NH(3) fluxes agreed well with independent above-canopy flux estimates. Based on the model results, the urea fertilized soil surface was a consistent source of NH(3) one month following the fertilizer application, whereas the vegetation canopy was typically a net NH(3) sink with the lower portion of the canopy being a constant sink. The model results suggested that the canopy was a sink for some 70% of the estimated soil NH(3) emissions. A logical conclusion is that parametrization of within-canopy processes in air quality models are necessary to explore the impact of agricultural field level management practices on regional air quality. Moreover, there are agronomic and environmental benefits to timing liquid fertilizer applications as close to canopy closure as possible. Finally, given the large within-canopy mean NH(3) concentration gradients in such agricultural settings, a discussion about the suitability of the proposed model is also presented.

Poverty and Place in the Context of the American South

In the United States, poverty has been historically higher and disproportionately concentrated in the American South. Despite this fact, much of the conventional poverty literature in the United States has focused on urban poverty in cities, particularly in the Northeast and Midwest. Relatively less American poverty research has focused on the enduring economic distress in the South, which Wimberley (2008:899) calls “a neglected regional crisis of historic and contemporary urgency.” Accordingly, this dissertation contributes to the inequality literature by focusing much needed attention on poverty in the South.

Each empirical chapter focuses on a different aspect of poverty in the South. Chapter 2 examines why poverty is higher in the South relative to the Non-South. Chapter 3 focuses on poverty predictors within the South and whether there are differences in the sub-regions of the Deep South and Peripheral South. These two chapters compare the roles of family demography, economic structure, racial/ethnic composition and heterogeneity, and power resources in shaping poverty. Chapter 4 examines whether poverty in the South has been shaped by historical racial regimes.

The Luxembourg Income Study (LIS) United States datasets (2000, 2004, 2007, 2010, and 2013) (derived from the U.S. Census Current Population Survey (CPS) Annual Social and Economic Supplement) provide all the individual-level data for this study. The LIS sample of 745,135 individuals is nested in rich economic, political, and racial state-level data compiled from multiple sources (e.g. U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Agriculture, University of Kentucky Center for Poverty Research, etc.). Analyses involve a combination of techniques including linear probability regression models to predict poverty and binary decomposition of poverty differences.

Chapter 2 results suggest that power resources, followed by economic structure, are most important in explaining the higher poverty in the South. This underscores the salience of political and economic contexts in shaping poverty across place. Chapter 3 results indicate that individual-level economic factors are the largest predictors of poverty within the South, and even more so in the Deep South. Moreover, divergent results between the South, Deep South, and Peripheral South illustrate how the impact of poverty predictors can vary in different contexts. Chapter 4 results show significant bivariate associations between historical race regimes and poverty among Southern states, although regression models fail to yield significant effects. Conversely, historical race regimes do have a small, but significant effect in explaining the Black-White poverty gap. Results also suggest that employment and education are key to understanding poverty among Blacks and the Black-White poverty gap. Collectively, these chapters underscore why place is so important for understanding poverty and inequality. They also illustrate the salience of micro and macro characteristics of place for helping create, maintain, and reproduce systems of inequality across place.