MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412835255 · doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2025.109689

Using weather forecasts to avoid major emission events of N2O in connection with manure application

2025· article· en· W4412835255 on OpenAlexaff
Line Vinther Hansen, Azeem Tariq, Lars Stoumann Jensen, Sander Bruun

Bibliographic record

VenueAgricultural Water Management · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
FundersLandbrugsstyrelsenMiljø- og FødevareministerietNational Institute of Food and AgricultureMinistry of EnvironmentMinisteriet for Fø devarer, Landbrug og Fiskeri
KeywordsConnection (principal bundle)Environmental scienceManureMeteorologyClimatologyGeographyAgronomyMathematicsGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Choosing the appropriate timing of fertilisation is one of the primary managerial strategies to avoid emissions of nitrous oxide. To minimise odour nuisance and ammonia volatilisation, farmers are advised to apply pig slurry (PS) before light rainfall events. However, application of manure at the time of heavy rain events can pose a high risk of nitrous oxide (N 2 O) emissions, and analysing weather forecasts to avoid this could be important to mitigate emissions. A controlled field experiment was conducted to assess the effect of rainfall around the time of PS fertilisation on soil N 2 O emissions. The main findings were: 1) Rainfall treatments showed slight peaks in N 2 O emissions up to 3.9 mg N 2 O-N ha −1 day −1 after a rain event, and cumulative N 2 O emissions were numerically higher compared to the treatment without rainfall, suggesting a higher risk when manure application coincides with rainfall. 2) However, the short duration of elevated soil water content with more than 80 % water-filled pore space (WFPS) lasting only a few days after a rain event, may not have been sufficient to create anoxic conditions necessary for substantial N 2 O emissions from PS. This study's simulated rain approach can be used for future manipulative studies of field sites to further investigate mitigation options related to rainfall to inform best practices for fertiliser application in relation to weather forecasts.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.220
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgricultural Water ManagementSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207