Predicting nitrous oxide emissions after the application of solid manure to grassland in the United Kingdom

Nitrous oxide (N2O) emission from agricultural soils represents a significant source of greenhouse gas to the atmosphere. We evaluated the suitability of a modified Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model to estimate the N2O flux from the application of solid manure at two grassland sites (North...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of environmental quality 2020-01, Vol.49 (1), p.1-13
Hauptverfasser: Melaku, Nigus Demelash, Shrestha, Narayan Kumar, Wang, Junye, Thorman, Rachel E.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 13
container_issue 1
container_start_page 1
container_title Journal of environmental quality
container_volume 49
creator Melaku, Nigus Demelash
Shrestha, Narayan Kumar
Wang, Junye
Thorman, Rachel E.
description Nitrous oxide (N2O) emission from agricultural soils represents a significant source of greenhouse gas to the atmosphere. We evaluated the suitability of a modified Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model to estimate the N2O flux from the application of solid manure at two grassland sites (North Wyke [NW] and Pwllpeiran [PW]) in the United Kingdom. The simulated N2O emissions were validated against field observations measured in 2011 and 2012 for model calibration and validation, respectively. The SWAT model predicts water‐filled pore space (WFPS) very well with Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), R2, RMSE, and percentage bias (PBIAS) values of 0.67, .72, 0.06, and 3.64, respectively, during the calibration period for NW site, whereas it gives 0.68, .69, 0.07, and 3.04, respectively during the validation period. At PW, the model predicted the NSE, R2, RMSE, and PBIAS of 0.55, .69, 0.04, and −4.5, respectively, during calibration and 0.63, .71, 0.05, and −2.6, respectively, during the validation period. Compared with WFPS, the model resulted in a slightly lower fit for N2O emissions for NW (NSE = 0.47, R2 = .63 during calibration, and NSE = 0.55, R2 = .58 during validation) and for PW (NSE = 0.54, R2 = .71 for calibration, and NSE = 0.47, R2 = .69 for validation). Results revealed that the SWAT model performed reasonably well in representing the dynamics of N2O emissions after solid manure application to grassland.
doi_str_mv 10.1002/jeq2.20002
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2448641367</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2448641367</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3062-c2d22e18a7e16e3e9149e5964637c3f4f41b5fa163090a6f73b1e7bd1b3419f33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kMtOwzAQRS0EEqWw4Qu8REgtfsVplqjiXQmQ6Npy4nFxSeLUTgX9e9yGNZuZ0ejM1dyL0CUlU0oIu1nDhk0ZSeMRGtGM5xOWyjEaESLSLFh2is5iXBNCGcnlCH29BTCu6l27wq3rg99G7H-cAQyNi9H5NmJtewi4_wSsu652le7TGnuLo6-dwY1utwFw7_Eq6Bhr3Rrs2gO_TJJg8EtSN745RydW1xEu_voYLe_vPuaPk8Xrw9P8djGpOJFsUjHDGNCZzoFK4FBQUUBWSCF5XnErrKBlZjWVnBRES5vzkkJeGlpyQQvL-RhdDbpd8JstxF4lKxXU6TNI_hQTYiYF5TJP6PWAVsHHGMCqLrhGh52iRO0TVftE1SHRBNMB_nY17P4h1fPdOxtufgG7SHjb</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2448641367</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Predicting nitrous oxide emissions after the application of solid manure to grassland in the United Kingdom</title><source>Wiley Journals</source><creator>Melaku, Nigus Demelash ; Shrestha, Narayan Kumar ; Wang, Junye ; Thorman, Rachel E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Melaku, Nigus Demelash ; Shrestha, Narayan Kumar ; Wang, Junye ; Thorman, Rachel E.</creatorcontrib><description>Nitrous oxide (N2O) emission from agricultural soils represents a significant source of greenhouse gas to the atmosphere. We evaluated the suitability of a modified Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model to estimate the N2O flux from the application of solid manure at two grassland sites (North Wyke [NW] and Pwllpeiran [PW]) in the United Kingdom. The simulated N2O emissions were validated against field observations measured in 2011 and 2012 for model calibration and validation, respectively. The SWAT model predicts water‐filled pore space (WFPS) very well with Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), R2, RMSE, and percentage bias (PBIAS) values of 0.67, .72, 0.06, and 3.64, respectively, during the calibration period for NW site, whereas it gives 0.68, .69, 0.07, and 3.04, respectively during the validation period. At PW, the model predicted the NSE, R2, RMSE, and PBIAS of 0.55, .69, 0.04, and −4.5, respectively, during calibration and 0.63, .71, 0.05, and −2.6, respectively, during the validation period. Compared with WFPS, the model resulted in a slightly lower fit for N2O emissions for NW (NSE = 0.47, R2 = .63 during calibration, and NSE = 0.55, R2 = .58 during validation) and for PW (NSE = 0.54, R2 = .71 for calibration, and NSE = 0.47, R2 = .69 for validation). Results revealed that the SWAT model performed reasonably well in representing the dynamics of N2O emissions after solid manure application to grassland.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0047-2425</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1537-2537</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/jeq2.20002</identifier><language>eng</language><ispartof>Journal of environmental quality, 2020-01, Vol.49 (1), p.1-13</ispartof><rights>2020 The Authors. Journal of Environmental Quality © 2020 American Society of Agronomy, Crop Science Society of America, and Soil Science Society of America</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3062-c2d22e18a7e16e3e9149e5964637c3f4f41b5fa163090a6f73b1e7bd1b3419f33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c3062-c2d22e18a7e16e3e9149e5964637c3f4f41b5fa163090a6f73b1e7bd1b3419f33</cites><orcidid>0000-0001-7042-4501 ; 0000-0001-5562-1400</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Fjeq2.20002$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Fjeq2.20002$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1417,27924,27925,45574,45575</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Melaku, Nigus Demelash</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shrestha, Narayan Kumar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Junye</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thorman, Rachel E.</creatorcontrib><title>Predicting nitrous oxide emissions after the application of solid manure to grassland in the United Kingdom</title><title>Journal of environmental quality</title><description>Nitrous oxide (N2O) emission from agricultural soils represents a significant source of greenhouse gas to the atmosphere. We evaluated the suitability of a modified Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model to estimate the N2O flux from the application of solid manure at two grassland sites (North Wyke [NW] and Pwllpeiran [PW]) in the United Kingdom. The simulated N2O emissions were validated against field observations measured in 2011 and 2012 for model calibration and validation, respectively. The SWAT model predicts water‐filled pore space (WFPS) very well with Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), R2, RMSE, and percentage bias (PBIAS) values of 0.67, .72, 0.06, and 3.64, respectively, during the calibration period for NW site, whereas it gives 0.68, .69, 0.07, and 3.04, respectively during the validation period. At PW, the model predicted the NSE, R2, RMSE, and PBIAS of 0.55, .69, 0.04, and −4.5, respectively, during calibration and 0.63, .71, 0.05, and −2.6, respectively, during the validation period. Compared with WFPS, the model resulted in a slightly lower fit for N2O emissions for NW (NSE = 0.47, R2 = .63 during calibration, and NSE = 0.55, R2 = .58 during validation) and for PW (NSE = 0.54, R2 = .71 for calibration, and NSE = 0.47, R2 = .69 for validation). Results revealed that the SWAT model performed reasonably well in representing the dynamics of N2O emissions after solid manure application to grassland.</description><issn>0047-2425</issn><issn>1537-2537</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kMtOwzAQRS0EEqWw4Qu8REgtfsVplqjiXQmQ6Npy4nFxSeLUTgX9e9yGNZuZ0ejM1dyL0CUlU0oIu1nDhk0ZSeMRGtGM5xOWyjEaESLSLFh2is5iXBNCGcnlCH29BTCu6l27wq3rg99G7H-cAQyNi9H5NmJtewi4_wSsu652le7TGnuLo6-dwY1utwFw7_Eq6Bhr3Rrs2gO_TJJg8EtSN745RydW1xEu_voYLe_vPuaPk8Xrw9P8djGpOJFsUjHDGNCZzoFK4FBQUUBWSCF5XnErrKBlZjWVnBRES5vzkkJeGlpyQQvL-RhdDbpd8JstxF4lKxXU6TNI_hQTYiYF5TJP6PWAVsHHGMCqLrhGh52iRO0TVftE1SHRBNMB_nY17P4h1fPdOxtufgG7SHjb</recordid><startdate>202001</startdate><enddate>202001</enddate><creator>Melaku, Nigus Demelash</creator><creator>Shrestha, Narayan Kumar</creator><creator>Wang, Junye</creator><creator>Thorman, Rachel E.</creator><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7042-4501</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5562-1400</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202001</creationdate><title>Predicting nitrous oxide emissions after the application of solid manure to grassland in the United Kingdom</title><author>Melaku, Nigus Demelash ; Shrestha, Narayan Kumar ; Wang, Junye ; Thorman, Rachel E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c3062-c2d22e18a7e16e3e9149e5964637c3f4f41b5fa163090a6f73b1e7bd1b3419f33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Melaku, Nigus Demelash</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shrestha, Narayan Kumar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Junye</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thorman, Rachel E.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of environmental quality</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Melaku, Nigus Demelash</au><au>Shrestha, Narayan Kumar</au><au>Wang, Junye</au><au>Thorman, Rachel E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Predicting nitrous oxide emissions after the application of solid manure to grassland in the United Kingdom</atitle><jtitle>Journal of environmental quality</jtitle><date>2020-01</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>49</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>13</epage><pages>1-13</pages><issn>0047-2425</issn><eissn>1537-2537</eissn><abstract>Nitrous oxide (N2O) emission from agricultural soils represents a significant source of greenhouse gas to the atmosphere. We evaluated the suitability of a modified Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWAT) model to estimate the N2O flux from the application of solid manure at two grassland sites (North Wyke [NW] and Pwllpeiran [PW]) in the United Kingdom. The simulated N2O emissions were validated against field observations measured in 2011 and 2012 for model calibration and validation, respectively. The SWAT model predicts water‐filled pore space (WFPS) very well with Nash–Sutcliffe efficiency (NSE), R2, RMSE, and percentage bias (PBIAS) values of 0.67, .72, 0.06, and 3.64, respectively, during the calibration period for NW site, whereas it gives 0.68, .69, 0.07, and 3.04, respectively during the validation period. At PW, the model predicted the NSE, R2, RMSE, and PBIAS of 0.55, .69, 0.04, and −4.5, respectively, during calibration and 0.63, .71, 0.05, and −2.6, respectively, during the validation period. Compared with WFPS, the model resulted in a slightly lower fit for N2O emissions for NW (NSE = 0.47, R2 = .63 during calibration, and NSE = 0.55, R2 = .58 during validation) and for PW (NSE = 0.54, R2 = .71 for calibration, and NSE = 0.47, R2 = .69 for validation). Results revealed that the SWAT model performed reasonably well in representing the dynamics of N2O emissions after solid manure application to grassland.</abstract><doi>10.1002/jeq2.20002</doi><tpages>13</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7042-4501</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5562-1400</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0047-2425
ispartof Journal of environmental quality, 2020-01, Vol.49 (1), p.1-13
issn 0047-2425
1537-2537
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2448641367
source Wiley Journals
title Predicting nitrous oxide emissions after the application of solid manure to grassland in the United Kingdom
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-27T06%3A24%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Predicting%20nitrous%20oxide%20emissions%20after%20the%20application%20of%20solid%20manure%20to%20grassland%20in%20the%20United%20Kingdom&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20environmental%20quality&rft.au=Melaku,%20Nigus%20Demelash&rft.date=2020-01&rft.volume=49&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=13&rft.pages=1-13&rft.issn=0047-2425&rft.eissn=1537-2537&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/jeq2.20002&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2448641367%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2448641367&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true