Greenhouse gas mitigation potential of shelterbelts: estimating farm-scale emission reductions using the Holos model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shelterbelts provide an opportunity for carbon (C) sequestration and have the potential to mitigate agricultural greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. However, the influence of shelterbelts on GHG emissions at the farm scale is poorly understood. We estimated the potential of three shelterbelt tree species: hybrid poplar, white spruce, and caragana at five planting densities, to reduce GHG emissions in a model farm (cereal–pulse rotation). The Holos model, a Canadian farm-level GHG calculator developed by Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada, was used to estimate shelterbelt effects on farm GHG emissions over a 60 yr time frame. The planting densities of the shelterbelts represented 0%, 0.5%, 1.0%, 3.0%, and 5.0% of the total area of an average (688 ha) Saskatchewan farm. The greatest reduction in farm GHG emissions was estimated for hybrid poplar (23.0%) followed by white spruce (17.5%) and caragana (8.2%) — all at the highest planting density. The GHG mitigation by the shelterbelts was attributable primarily (90%–95% of GHG reduction) to C sequestration in tree biomass and in soil organic carbon (SOC) pools, with the remainder due to lower N2O, CH4 emissions, and a reduction in farm energy use. The GHG estimates from Holos agree with field measurements and suggests that species selection will be important for maximizing C sequestration and GHG mitigation potential of shelterbelt systems; conversely, shelterbelt removal from the agricultural landscape suggests an increase of on-farm GHG emissions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".