4.2 Review

Modelling nitrous oxide emissions: comparing algorithms in six widely used agro-ecological models

Journal

SOIL RESEARCH
Volume 61, Issue 6, Pages 523-541

Publisher

CSIRO PUBLISHING
DOI: 10.1071/SR22009

Keywords

agriculture; agro-ecological models; algorithm comparison; denitrification; N2O emissions; nitrification; soil; soil-atmosphere flux

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Agricultural soils are a major source of nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions, primarily through microbial processes of ammonium oxidation and denitrification. Existing agro-ecological models vary in their understanding and treatment of these processes, as well as their ability to integrate multiple environmental factors. The comparison of six models revealed that environmental factors have differential impacts on nitrification and denitrification, indicating the need for improved quantification and understanding of these processes. Further measurements and research are necessary to enhance model algorithms and reduce errors in predicting N2O emissions.
Agricultural soils are the most important anthropogenic source of nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions. This occurs via two main pathways: (1) from microbial-mediated oxidation of ammonium to nitrite and nitrate; and (2) denitrification. Most agro-ecological models explicitly deal with these two pathways albeit with different degrees of process understanding and empiricism. Models that integrate the impact of multiple environmental factors on N2O emissions can provide estimates of N2O fluxes from complex agricultural systems. However, uncertainties in model predictions arise from differences in the algorithms, imperfect quantification of the nitrification and denitrification response to edaphic conditions, and the spatial and temporal variability of N2O fluxes resulting from variable soil conditions. This study compared N2O responses to environmental factors in six agro-ecological models. The comparisons showed that environmental factors impact nitrification and denitrification differently in each model. Reasons include the inability to apportion the total N2O flux to the specific N transformation rates used to validate and calibrate the simplifications represented in the model algorithms, and incomplete understanding of the multiple interactions between processes and modifying factors as these are generally not quantified in field experiments. Rather, N2O flux data is reported as total or net N2O emissions without attributing emissions to gross and/or net rates for specific N processes, or considering changes that occur between production and emissions. Additional measurements that quantify all processes understand the multiple interactions that affect N2O emissions are needed to improve model algorithms and reduce the error associated with predicted emissions.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available