Articles | Volume 17, issue 22
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8181-2024
https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-17-8181-2024
Model description paper
 | 
20 Nov 2024
Model description paper |  | 20 Nov 2024

A dynamical process-based model for quantifying global agricultural ammonia emissions – AMmonia–CLIMate v1.0 (AMCLIM v1.0) – Part 1: Land module for simulating emissions from synthetic fertilizer use

Jize Jiang, David S. Stevenson, and Mark A. Sutton

Related authors

A dynamical process-based model for quantifying global agricultural ammonia emissions – AMmonia–CLIMate v1.0 (AMCLIM v1.0) – Part 2: livestock farming
Jize Jiang, David S. Stevenson, Aimable Uwizeye, Giuseppe Tempio, Alessandra Falcucci, Flavia Casu, and Mark A. Sutton
EGUsphere, https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3803,https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2024-3803, 2024
Short summary
Analysis of atmospheric ammonia over South and East Asia based on the MOZART-4 model and its comparison with satellite and surface observations
Pooja V. Pawar, Sachin D. Ghude, Chinmay Jena, Andrea Móring, Mark A. Sutton, Santosh Kulkarni, Deen Mani Lal, Divya Surendran, Martin Van Damme, Lieven Clarisse, Pierre-François Coheur, Xuejun Liu, Gaurav Govardhan, Wen Xu, Jize Jiang, and Tapan Kumar Adhya
Atmos. Chem. Phys., 21, 6389–6409, https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6389-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/acp-21-6389-2021, 2021
Short summary
A climate-dependent global model of ammonia emissions from chicken farming
Jize Jiang, David S. Stevenson, Aimable Uwizeye, Giuseppe Tempio, and Mark A. Sutton
Biogeosciences, 18, 135–158, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-135-2021,https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-18-135-2021, 2021
Short summary

Related subject area

Biogeosciences
Process-based modeling of solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence with VISIT-SIF version 1.0
Tatsuya Miyauchi, Makoto Saito, Hibiki M. Noda, Akihiko Ito, Tomomichi Kato, and Tsuneo Matsunaga
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2329–2347, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2329-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2329-2025, 2025
Short summary
Including the phosphorus cycle into the LPJ-GUESS dynamic global vegetation model (v4.1, r10994) – global patterns and temporal trends of N and P primary production limitation
Mateus Dantas de Paula, Matthew Forrest, David Warlind, João Paulo Darela Filho, Katrin Fleischer, Anja Rammig, and Thomas Hickler
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2249–2274, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2249-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2249-2025, 2025
Short summary
A comprehensive land-surface vegetation model for multi-stream data assimilation, D&B v1.0
Wolfgang Knorr, Matthew Williams, Tea Thum, Thomas Kaminski, Michael Voßbeck, Marko Scholze, Tristan Quaife, T. Luke Smallman, Susan C. Steele-Dunne, Mariette Vreugdenhil, Tim Green, Sönke Zaehle, Mika Aurela, Alexandre Bouvet, Emanuel Bueechi, Wouter Dorigo, Tarek S. El-Madany, Mirco Migliavacca, Marika Honkanen, Yann H. Kerr, Anna Kontu, Juha Lemmetyinen, Hannakaisa Lindqvist, Arnaud Mialon, Tuuli Miinalainen, Gaétan Pique, Amanda Ojasalo, Shaun Quegan, Peter J. Rayner, Pablo Reyes-Muñoz, Nemesio Rodríguez-Fernández, Mike Schwank, Jochem Verrelst, Songyan Zhu, Dirk Schüttemeyer, and Matthias Drusch
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2137–2159, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2137-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2137-2025, 2025
Short summary
Sources of uncertainty in the SPITFIRE global fire model: development of LPJmL-SPITFIRE1.9 and directions for future improvements
Luke Oberhagemann, Maik Billing, Werner von Bloh, Markus Drüke, Matthew Forrest, Simon P. K. Bowring, Jessica Hetzer, Jaime Ribalaygua Batalla, and Kirsten Thonicke
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 2021–2050, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2021-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-2021-2025, 2025
Short summary
The unicellular NUM v.0.91: a trait-based plankton model evaluated in two contrasting biogeographic provinces
Trine Frisbæk Hansen, Donald Eugene Canfield, Ken Haste Andersen, and Christian Jannik Bjerrum
Geosci. Model Dev., 18, 1895–1916, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1895-2025,https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-18-1895-2025, 2025
Short summary

Cited articles

Aneja, V. P., Schlesinger, W. H., Erisman, J. W., Behera, S. N., Sharma, M., and Battye, W.: Reactive nitrogen emissions from crop and livestock farming in India, Atmos. Environ., 47, 92–103, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.atmosenv.2011.11.026, 2012. 
Aneja, V. P., Schlesinger, W. H., Li, Q., Nahas, A., and Battye, W. H.: Characterization of the Global Sources of Atmospheric Ammonia from Agricultural Soils, J. Geophys. Res.-Atmos., 125, e2019JD03168, https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JD031684, 2020. 
Bash, J. O., Cooter, E. J., Dennis, R. L., Walker, J. T., and Pleim, J. E.: Evaluation of a regional air-quality model with bidirectional NH3 exchange coupled to an agroecosystem model, Biogeosciences, 10, 1635–1645, https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-1635-2013, 2013. 
Bateman, E. J. and Baggs, E. M.: Contributions of nitrification and denitrification to N2O emissions from soils at different water-filled pore space, Biol. Fertil. Soils, 41, 379–388, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-005-0858-3, 2005. 
Beaudor, M., Vuichard, N., Lathière, J., Evangeliou, N., Van Damme, M., Clarisse, L., and Hauglustaine, D.: Global agricultural ammonia emissions simulated with the ORCHIDEE land surface model, Geosci. Model Dev., 16, 1053–1081, https://doi.org/10.5194/gmd-16-1053-2023, 2023. 
Download
Short summary
A special model called AMmonia–CLIMate (AMCLIM) has been developed to understand and calculate NH3 emissions from fertilizer use and also taking into account how the environment influences these NH3 emissions. It is estimated that about 17 % of applied N in fertilizers was lost due to NH3 emissions. Hot and dry conditions and regions with high-pH soils can expect higher NH3 emissions.
Share