MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4226054255 · doi:10.1029/2021wr031587

Characterizing Catchment‐Scale Nitrogen Legacies and Constraining Their Uncertainties

2022· article· en· W4226054255 on OpenAlexaff
Fanny Sarrazin, Rohini Kumar, N. B. Basu, Andréas Musolff, Michael Weber, K. J. Van Meter, Sabine Attinger

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEquifinalityEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Drainage basinGroundwaterScale (ratio)WatershedResidualSoil scienceGeologyGeographyEcologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Improving nitrogen (N) status in European water bodies is a pressing issue. N levels depend not only on current but also past N inputs to the landscape, that have accumulated through time in legacy stores (e.g., soil, groundwater). Catchment‐scale N models, that are commonly used to investigate in‐stream N levels, rarely examine the magnitude and dynamics of legacy components. This study aims to gain a better understanding of the long‐term fate of the N inputs and its uncertainties, using a legacy‐driven N model (ELEMeNT) in Germany's largest national river basin (Weser; 38,450 km 2 ) over the period 1960–2015. We estimate the nine model parameters based on a progressive constraining strategy, to assess the value of different observational data sets. We demonstrate that beyond in‐stream N loading, soil N content and in‐stream N concentration allow to reduce the equifinality in model parameterizations. We find that more than 50% of the N surplus denitrifies (1480–2210 kg ha −1 ) and the stream export amounts to around 18% (410–640 kg ha −1 ), leaving behind as much as around 230–780 kg ha −1 of N in the (soil) source zone and 10–105 kg ha −1 in the subsurface. A sensitivity analysis reveals the importance of different factors affecting the residual uncertainties in simulated N legacies, namely hydrologic travel time, denitrification rates, a coefficient characterizing the protection of organic N in source zone and N surplus input. Our study calls for proper consideration of uncertainties in N legacy characterization, and discusses possible avenues to further reduce the equifinality in water quality modeling.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations29
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Resources ResearchSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207