| Title |
Mitigating Global Warming Potentials of Methane and Nitrous Oxide Gases from Rice Paddies under different irrigation regimes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Ambio, September 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s13280-012-0349-3 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Muhammad Aslam Ali, M. Anamul Hoque, Pil Joo Kim |
| Abstract |
A field experiment was conducted in Bangladesh Agricultural University Farm to investigate the mitigating effects of soil amendments such as calcium carbide, calcium silicate, phosphogypsum, and biochar with urea fertilizer on global warming potentials (GWPs) of methane (CH4) and nitrous oxide (N2O) gases during rice cultivation under continuous and intermittent irrigations. Among the amendments phosphogypsum and silicate fertilizer, being potential source of electron acceptors, decreased maximum level of seasonal CH4 flux by 25-27 % and 32-38 % in continuous and intermittent irrigations, respectively. Biochar and calcium carbide amendments, acting as nitrification inhibitors, decreased N2O emissions by 36-40 % and 26-30 % under continuous and intermittent irrigations, respectively. The total GWP of CH4 and N2O gases were decreased by 7-27 % and 6-34 % with calcium carbide, phosphogypsum, and silicate fertilizer amendments under continuous and intermittent irrigations, respectively. However, biochar amendments increased overall GWP of CH4 and N2O gases. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 147 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| India | 2 | 1% |
| Ireland | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 141 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 38 | 26% |
| Researcher | 21 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 6% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 18 | 12% |
| Unknown | 39 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 47 | 32% |
| Environmental Science | 37 | 25% |
| Earth and Planetary Sciences | 5 | 3% |
| Engineering | 2 | 1% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 1% |
| Other | 8 | 5% |
| Unknown | 46 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 01 July 2016.
All research outputs
#6,926,576
of 22,712,476 outputs
Outputs from Ambio
#961
of 1,622 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,919
of 171,840 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Ambio
#10
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,712,476 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,622 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.1. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 171,840 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.