MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413306770 · doi:10.1038/s44221-025-00465-0

The important role of wetland conservation and restoration in nitrogen removal across European river basins

2025· article· en· W4413306770 on OpenAlexaff
Leonardo Bertassello, N. B. Basu, Joachim Maes, Bruna Grizzetti, Alessandra La Notte, Luc Feyen

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Water · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWetlandEnvironmental scienceDrainage basinHydrology (agriculture)ConservationWater resource managementStream restorationNitrogenGeographyEcologyEnvironmental resource managementGeologyBiologyChemistryHabitatCartographyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In Europe, excessive inputs of nitrogen threaten ecosystems and public health. Wetlands act as natural filters, removing excess nutrients and protecting downstream waters. Using high-resolution data on nitrogen surplus and wetland distribution, we estimate that existing European wetlands remove 1,092 ± 95 kt of nitrogen per year. Restoring 27% of wetlands historically drained for agriculture (3% of land area), targeted in high nitrogen input areas, could reduce current nitrogen loads to the sea by 36%, but with potential costs to agricultural productivity. A more efficient strategy targets wetland restoration on farmlands projected to be abandoned by 2040, yielding a 22% load reduction and enabling major rivers such as the Rhine, Elbe and Vistula to meet water quality targets with minimal agricultural impact. Our findings highlight wetland restoration as a cost-effective, policy-relevant solution that, if spatially targeted, can deliver major water quality improvements while supporting the European Union’s broader goals on climate, biodiversity and agricultural sustainability.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations22
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature WaterSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207