Effects of Grazing Management on Spatio-Temporal Heterogeneity of Soil Carbon and Greenhouse Gas Emissions of Grasslands and Rangelands: Monitoring, Modelling and Upscaling
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The sustainability of grazing lands lies in the nexus of human consumption behavior, livestock productivity, and environmental sustainability. Due to fast growing global food demands, many grazing lands have suffered from overgrazing, leading to soil degradation, air and water pollution, and biodiversity losses. Multidisciplinary efforts are required to understand how grazing lands can be better monitored, assessed and managed to attain predictable outcomes of optimal benefit to society. This paper synthesizes our understanding based on previous work done on impacts of grazing on ecosystem goods and services, identifies current knowledge gaps, and formulates a plan forward. We review the impacts of two contrasting grazing systems, continuous and multi-paddock rotational grazing, on soil carbon (C), nutrient cycling and greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). We then extend our review to explore challenges of incorporating spatial heterogeneity and temporal variability into monitoring and modelling C and nutrient cycling in grazing lands. We revisit two process-based models (i.e., DNDC and DayCent) and two watershed models (i.e., SWAT and VIC) widely used to simulate C, nutrient and water cycles of these lands. Finally we identify research directions for improving the knowledge base which is essential to conserve grazing lands and maintain their ecosystem goods and services.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".