MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2552271262 · doi:10.2134/jeq2016.04.0122

Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Stored Dairy Slurry from Multiple Farms

2016· article· en· W2552271262 on OpenAlexaff
Etienne Le Riche, Andrew VanderZaag, Jeffrey D. Wood, Claudia Wagner‐Riddle, Kari E. Dunfield, Ngwa Martin Ngwabie, John McCabe, Robert J. Gordon

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Quality · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicOdor and Emission Control Technologies
Canadian institutionsNova Scotia Department of AgricultureWilfrid Laurier UniversityAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSlurryGreenhouse gasEnvironmental scienceWaste managementGreenhouseEnvironmental engineeringAgronomyEcologyEngineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A significant need exists to improve our understanding of the extent of greenhouse gas emissions from the storage of livestock manure to both improve the reliability of inventory assessments and the impact of beneficial management practice adoption. Factors affecting the extent and variability of greenhouse gas emissions from stored dairy manure were investigated. Emissions from six slurries stored in clean concrete tanks under identical “warm‐season” conditions were monitored consecutively over 173 d (18°C average air temperature). Methane (CH 4 ) emissions varied considerably among the manures from 6.3 to 25.9 g m −2 d −1 and accounted for ∼96% of the total CO 2 equivalent greenhouse gas emissions. The duration of the lag period, when methane emissions were near baseline levels, varied from 30 to 90 d from the beginning of storage. As a result, CH 4 emissions were poorly correlated with air temperature prior to the time of peak emissions (i.e., the initial 48 to 108 d of storage) but improved afterward. The air temperature following the time of the peak CH 4 flux and the length of the active methanogenesis period (i.e., when the daily CH 4 emissions ≥ 7.6 g m −2 d −1 ) were highly correlated with CH 4 emissions ( R 2 = 0.98, p < 0.01). Methane conversion factors (MCFs) ranged from 0.08 to 0.52 for the different manures. The MCFs generated from existing CH 4 emission models were correlated ( R 2 = 0.68, p = 0.02) to MCFs calculated for the active methanogenesis period for manure containing wood bedding. A temperature component was added that improved the accuracy ( R 2 = 0.82, p < 0.01). This demonstrated that an improved understanding of lag period dynamics will enhance stored dairy manure greenhouse gas emission inventory calculations. Core Ideas CH 4 emissions and MCFs from six dairy slurries varied despite identical storage conditions. Postpeak CH 4 emissions were more consistent among slurries compared with prepeak periods. CH 4 emissions represented ∼96% of the overall GHG budget. N 2 O emissions were low but represented an 8× greater portion of the GHG budget for tie‐stall than free‐stall systems.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations19
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental QualitySame topicOdor and Emission Control TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207