Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31466212›Full record

ArticleThe Science of the total environment2019

Toward the improvement of total nitrogen deposition budgets in the United States.

J T Walker, G Beachley, H M Amos, J S Baron, J Bash, R Baumgardner, M D Bell, K B Benedict, X Chen, D W Clow and 40 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Science of the total environment, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Nitrogen compounds at Mexican and USA coasts on the Gulf of Mexico.Atmospheric environment (Oxford, England : 1994) · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Inorganic nitrogen deposition in arid land ecosystems of Central Asia.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2021
    Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

50 authors.

J T WalkerU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Durham, NC, United States of America. Electronic address: walker.johnt@epa.gov.
G BeachleyU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, Washington, DC, United States of America.
H M AmosAAAS Science and Technology Policy Fellow hosted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Washington, DC, United States of America.
J S BaronU.S. Geological Survey, Fort Collins Science Center, Fort Collins, CO, United States of America.
J BashU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Durham, NC, United States of America.
R BaumgardnerU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Durham, NC, United States of America.
M D BellNational Park Service, Air Resources Division, Lakewood, CO, United States of America.
K B BenedictColorado State University, Department of Atmospheric Science, Fort Collins, CO, United States of America.
X ChenU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Durham, NC, United States of America.
D W ClowU.S. Geological Survey, Colorado Water Science Center, Denver, CO, United States of America.
A ColeEnvironment and Climate Change Canada, Air Quality Research Division, Toronto, ON, Canada.
J G CoughlinU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 5, Chicago, IL, United States of America.
K CruzU.S. Department of Agriculture, National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Washington, DC, United States of America.
R W DalyU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Durham, NC, United States of America.
S M DecinaUniversity of California, Department of Chemistry, Berkeley, CA, United States of America.
E M ElliottUniversity of Pittsburgh, Department of Geology & Environmental Science, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America.
M E FennU.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Riverside, CA, United States of America.
L GanzeveldMeteorology and Air Quality (MAQ), Wageningen University and Research Centre, Wageningen, Netherlands.
K GebhartNational Park Service, Air Resources Division, Fort Collins, CO, United States of America.
S S IsilWood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc., Newberry, FL, United States of America.
B M KerschnerPrairie Research Institute, University of Illinois, Champaign, IL, United States of America.
R S LarsonWisconsin State Laboratory of Hygiene, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI, United States of America.
T LaveryEnvironmental Consultant, Cranston, RI, United States of America.
G G LearU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, Washington, DC, United States of America.
T MacyU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, Washington, DC, United States of America.
M A MastU.S. Geological Survey, Colorado Water Science Center, Denver, CO, United States of America.
K MishoeWood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc., Newberry, FL, United States of America.
K H MorrisNational Park Service, Air Resources Division, Lakewood, CO, United States of America.
P E PadgettU.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Southwest Research Station, Riverside, CA, United States of America.
R V PouyatU.S. Forest Service, Bethesda, MD, United States of America.
M PuchalskiU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air and Radiation, Washington, DC, United States of America.
H O T PyeU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Durham, NC, United States of America.
A W ReaU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Durham, NC, United States of America.
M F RhodesD&E Technical, Urbana, IL, United States of America.
C M RogersWood Environment & Infrastructure Solutions, Inc., Newberry, FL, United States of America.
R SaylorNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Air Resources Laboratory, Oak Ridge, TN, United States of America.
R ScheffeU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, Durham, NC, United States of America.
B A SchichtelNational Park Service, Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, United States of America.
D B SchwedeU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Durham, NC, United States of America.
G A SexstoneU.S. Geological Survey, Colorado Water Science Center, Denver, CO, United States of America.
B C SiveNational Park Service, Air Resources Division, Lakewood, CO, United States of America.
R Sosa EcheverríaCentro de Ciencias de la Atmosfera, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico.
P H TemplerBoston University, Department of Biology, Boston, MA, United States of America.
T ThompsonAAAS Science and Technology Policy Fellow hosted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Policy, Washington, DC, United States of America.
D TongGeorge Mason University. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Air Resources Laboratory, College Park, MD, United States of America.
G A WetherbeeU.S. Geological Survey, Hydrologic Networks Branch, Denver, CO, United States of America.
T H WhitlowCornell University, Department of Horticulture, Ithaca, NY, United States of America.
Z WuU.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Research and Development, Durham, NC, United States of America.
Z YuUniversity of Pittsburgh, Department of Geology & Environmental Science, Pittsburgh, PA, United States of America.
L ZhangEnvironment and Climate Change Canada, Air Quality Research Division, Toronto, ON, Canada.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Frameworks for limiting ecosystem exposure to excess nutrients and acidity require accurate and complete deposition budgets of reactive nitrogen (Nr). While much progress has been made in developing total Nr deposition budgets for the U.S., current budgets remain limited by key data and knowledge gaps. Analysis of National Atmospheric Deposition Program Total Deposition (NADP/TDep) data illustrates several aspects of current Nr deposition that motivate additional research. Averaged across the continental U.S., dry deposition contributes slightly more (55%) to total deposition than wet deposition and is the dominant process (>90%) over broad areas of the Southwest and other arid regions of the West. Lack of dry deposition measurements imposes a reliance on models, resulting in a much higher degree of uncertainty relative to wet deposition which is routinely measured. As nitrogen oxide (NO

Indexed as

AmmoniaDry depositionOrganic nitrogenOxidized nitrogenReactive nitrogenWet deposition

Identifiers

PMID31466212
PMCPMC7724633

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.