Estimates of Dust Emissions and Organic Carbon Losses Induced by Wind Erosion in Farmland Worldwide from 2017 to 2021
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Wind erosion can cause high dust emissions from agricultural land and can lead to a significant loss of carbon and nutrients from the soil. The carbon balance of farmland soil is an integral part of the carbon cycle, especially under the current drive to develop carbon-neutral practices. However, the amount of global carbon lost due to the wind erosion of farmland is unknown. In this study, global farmland dust emissions were estimated from a dust emission inventory (0.1° × 0.1°, daily) built using the improved Community Multiscale Air Quality Modeling System–FENGSHA (CMAQ-FENGSHA), and global farmland organic carbon losses were estimated by combining this with global soil organic carbon concentration data. The average global annual dust emissions from agricultural land from 2017 to 2021 were 1.75 × 109 g/s. Global dust emissions from agricultural land are concentrated in the UK, Ukraine, and Russia in Europe; in southern Canada and the central US in North America; in the area around Buenos Aires, the capital of Argentina, in South America; and in northeast China in Asia. The global average annual organic carbon loss from agricultural land was 2970 Gg for 2017–2021. The spatial distribution of emissions is roughly consistent with that of dust emissions, which are mainly concentrated in the world’s four major black soil regions. These estimates of dust and organic carbon losses from agricultural land are essential references that can inform the global responses to the carbon cycle, dust emissions, and black soil conservation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".