Enhanced nitrous oxide emission factors due to climate change increase the mitigation challenge in the agricultural sector
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Effective nitrogen fertilizer management is crucial for reducing nitrous oxide (N 2 O) emissions while ensuring food security within planetary boundaries. However, climate change might also interact with management practices to alter N 2 O emission and emission factors (EFs), adding further uncertainties to estimating mitigation potentials. Here, we developed a new hybrid modeling framework that integrates a machine learning model with an ensemble of eight process‐based models to project EFs under different climate and nitrogen policy scenarios. Our findings reveal that EFs are dynamically modulated by environmental changes, including climate, soil properties, and nitrogen management practices. Under low‐ambition nitrogen regulation policies, EF would increase from 1.18%–1.22% in 2010 to 1.27%–1.34% by 2050, representing a relative increase of 4.4%–11.4% and exceeding the IPCC tier‐1 EF of 1%. This trend is particularly pronounced in tropical and subtropical regions with high nitrogen inputs, where EFs could increase by 0.14%–0.35% (relative increase of 11.9%–17%). In contrast, high‐ambition policies have the potential to mitigate the increases in EF caused by climate change, possibly leading to slight decreases in EFs. Furthermore, our results demonstrate that global EFs are expected to continue rising due to warming and regional drying–wetting cycles, even in the absence of changes in nitrogen management practices. This asymmetrical influence of nitrogen fertilizers on EFs, driven by climate change, underscores the urgent need for immediate N 2 O emission reductions and further assessments of mitigation potentials. This hybrid modeling framework offers a computationally efficient approach to projecting future N 2 O emissions across various climate, soil, and nitrogen management scenarios, facilitating socio‐economic assessments and policy‐making 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 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".