Paddy rice methane emissions across Monsoon Asia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although rice cultivation is one of the most important agricultural sources of methane (CH4) and contributes ∼8% of total global anthropogenic emissions, large discrepancies remain among estimates of global CH4 emissions from rice cultivation (ranging from 18 to 115 Tg CH4 yr−1) due to a lack of observational constraints. The spatial distribution of paddy-rice emissions has been assessed at regional-to-global scales by bottom-up inventories and land surface models over coarse spatial resolution (e.g., > 0.5°) or spatial units (e.g., agro-ecological zones). However, high-resolution CH4 flux estimates capable of capturing the effects of local climate and management practices on emissions, as well as replicating in situ data, remain challenging to produce because of the scarcity of high-resolution maps of paddy-rice and insufficient understanding of CH4 predictors. Here, we combine paddy-rice methane-flux data from 23 global eddy covariance sites and MODIS remote sensing data with machine learning to 1) evaluate data-driven model performance and variable importance for predicting rice CH4 fluxes; and 2) produce gridded up-scaling estimates of rice CH4 emissions at 5000-m resolution across Monsoon Asia, where ∼87% of global rice area is cultivated and ∼ 90% of global rice production occurs. Our random-forest model achieved Nash-Sutcliffe Efficiency values of 0.59 and 0.69 for 8-day CH4 fluxes and site mean CH4 fluxes respectively, with land surface temperature, biomass and water-availability-related indices as the most important predictors. We estimate the average annual (winter fallow season excluded) paddy rice CH4 emissions throughout Monsoon Asia to be 20.6 ± 1.1 Tg yr−1 for 2001–2015, which is at the lower range of previous inventory-based estimates (20–32 CH4 Tg yr−1). Our estimates also suggest that CH4 emissions from paddy rice in this region have been declining from 2007 through 2015 following declines in both paddy-rice growing area and emission rates per unit area, suggesting that CH4 emissions from paddy rice in Monsoon Asia have likely not contributed to the renewed growth of atmospheric CH4 in recent years.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".