Abstract
This paper compares data on N fluxes compiled by Schulze and colleagues, with information available in the literature
and publicly available open databases, and finds important discrepancies for a number of such fluxes for Europe
(emissions, deposition, aerosol formation of compounds containing N) - exceeding a factor of two in several cases. A
qualitative assessment of the uncertainties of the respective approaches indicates that these differences are beyond the
uncertainty margins that can be reasonably attributed to the respective data.We conclude that the results should be used
with caution, that agricultural application of N should still be considered to be the largest source of N released to the
environment, and that this agricultural N affects soils more strongly than atmospheric deposition, at the European scale.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 2454-2757 |
| Number of pages | 304 |
| Journal | Global Change Biology |
| Issue number | 8 |
| Publication status | Published - 2011 |
Research Field
- Former Research Field - Innovation Systems and Policy
Keywords
- ammonia
- Europe
- nitric oxides
- nitrogen cycle
- nitrous oxide
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'The European nitrogen cycle: commentary on Schulze et.al. Global Change Biology (2010) 16, pp1451-1469'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver