MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406427796 · doi:10.1038/s43247-025-02001-0

Accounting for differences between crops and regions reduces estimates of nitrate leaching from nitrogen-fertilized soils

2025· article· en· W4406427796 on OpenAlexaff
Yan Wang, Yihong Liu, Longlong Xia, Hiroko Akiyama, Ji Chen, Yunying Fang, Tony Vancov, Yongfu Li, Dianming Wu, Bing Yu, Scott X. Chang, Yanjiang Cai

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Earth & Environment · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsLeaching (pedology)NitrogenEnvironmental scienceSoil waterNitrateAgronomySoil scienceAgroforestryEcologyChemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nitrate (NO3−) leaching from nitrogen (N) fertilized soils is a significant global concern, affecting both the environment and public health. However, substantial uncertainties and variabilities in NO3− leaching factors (LFs) among regions or crops impede accurate assessments of NO3− leaching. Here we synthesize 2500 field observations worldwide and show that LFs vary by an order of magnitude across regions and crops, primarily driven by hydroclimatic and edaphic conditions rather than N fertilizer management. Global cropland NO3− leaching from synthetic N fertilization, calculated through spatially explicit (15.4, 14.8–16.1 Tg N yr–1) and crop-specific (12.9, 11.0–14.8 Tg N yr–1) LFs, is 41% lower than the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Tier 1 global inventory. Over 47% of this leaching is concentrated in China, India, and the United States, with maize, wheat, rice and vegetables accounting for nearly half of it. Improved regional and crop-specific LFs will provide a benchmark for NO3− leaching abatement by pinpointing potential global hotspots. Almost half of globally leached nitrate from nitrogen-fertilized soil is released in China, India, and the United States, according to a meta-analysis covering 2500 field observations worldwide.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.330

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.215 · 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

Citations26
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications Earth & EnvironmentSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207