MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390445479 · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2023.119898

Seasonal ammonia emissions from an intensive beef cattle feedlot in Victoria Australia

2023· article· en· W4390445479 on OpenAlexaff
Qingmei Wang, Thomas K. Flesch, Mei Bai, Mengxuan Zhang, Deli Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Management · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldChemical Engineering
TopicOdor and Emission Control Technologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersMeat and Livestock Australia
KeywordsFeedlotEnvironmental scienceBeef cattleManure managementSeasonalityAnimal scienceManureGreenhouse gasLivestockStockpileAgronomyBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ammonia (NH3) emitted from concentrated animal feeding operations can cause environmental and health problems, and indirectly contribute to greenhouse gas emissions. Cattle feedlots are known to be large sources of NH3, but few studies have documented seasonal emissions from Australian feedlots. We conducted two field campaigns to measure NH3 emissions from an intensive beef cattle feedlot in southeast Australia, and these results were combined with previous measurements at the same feedlot to document seasonal variations in emissions and to derive annual feedlot emission factors (EFs). Emission rates were calculated with an inverse dispersion modelling (IDM) technique, based on NH3 concentrations measured at the feedlot with open-path lasers (OPLs). The average area emission rates in spring, summer, autumn and winter were 90.5, 167.4, 96.2 and 86.8 μg NH3 m−2 s−1 from the cattle pens, and 22.5, 18.1, 7.7 and 20.7 μg NH3 m−2 s−1 from the manure stockpile area, respectively. The total per-animal EFs ranged from 126.0 (autumn) to 190.2 g NH3 animal−1 d−1 (summer), representing a loss of 47.5–64.6% of the fed N. Seasonal variations in emissions were related to air temperature. Slight changes in crude protein content of the cattle diet may also have impacted seasonal variability. Taking seasonal variations into consideration, the average feedlot EF was 160.4 g NH3 animal−1 d−1, with 90% of the emissions coming from the cattle pens. Extrapolating the EF to all feedlot cattle in the country, the direct NH3 emissions from Australian feedlots amount to 65.2 Gg NH3 annually, or 3.7% of the national total. Our study benchmarks seasonal and annual EFs and N losses for Australian commercial feedlots, and provides a baseline for extrapolating the impacts of mitigation efforts.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.243 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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