Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33934301›Full record

ReviewEnvironmental science and pollution research international2021

Rice straw burning: a review on its global prevalence and the sustainable alternatives for its effective mitigation.

Gurraj Singh, Munish Kumar Gupta, Santan Chaurasiya, Vishal S Sharma, Danil Yu Pimenov

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Environmental science and pollution research international, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
6.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 190 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. 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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 5 countries.

Gurraj SinghIndustrial and Production Engineering Department, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar NIT Jalandhar, Jalandhar, Punjab, India.
Munish Kumar GuptaKey Laboratory of High Efficiency and Clean Mechanical Manufacture, Ministry of Education, School of Mechanical Engineering, Shandong University, Jinan, People's Republic of China. munishguptanit@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0777-1559
Santan ChaurasiyaIndustrial and Production Engineering Department, Dr. B.R. Ambedkar NIT Jalandhar, Jalandhar, Punjab, India.
Vishal S SharmaSchool of Mechanical, Industrial & Aeronautical Engineering, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Danil Yu PimenovDepartment of Automated Mechanical Engineering, South Ural State University, Lenin Prosp. 76, Chelyabinsk, 454080, Russia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5568-8928
Dr. B. R. Ambedkar National Institute of Technology Jalandhar · INSouth Ural State University · RUUniversity of the Witwatersrand · ZA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Being one of the most important staple crops of the world, rice has played a vital role in slaking the calorie requirements of the masses in all the inhabitable continents of our planet. Regardless of this fact, there are many environmental concerns related to the rice production systems across the globe. One of the major worries is the emission of lethal greenhouse gases as a result of the different steps and procedures concerned with rice production and their contribution towards global warming. This study presents the status quo of the rice straw burning practice across the globe. It focuses on the greenhouse gas emissions as a result of the open field burning of rice residues and its direct effect on the environment, eventually contributing towards climate change. The study evidently shortlists the most profound regions contributing towards the open burning dilemma and the socio-political reasons associated with it. The study additionally discusses the different alternatives to straw burning with a clear-cut motive of throwing light on the opportunities that lie in the efficacious and sustainable utilization of homogeneous agricultural wastes. Different in-field straw management techniques related to the farmers and off-field methods related to the industry have been discussed. Predicated upon a survey of the life cycle assessment (LCA) studies across the globe, it is concluded that soil incorporation and electricity generation are the most environment friendly alternatives with an enormous scope of improvement in the coming future.

Indexed as

Climate changesEnvironmental aspectsGovernment policiesGreenhouse gasesLife cycle assessmentRice straw burning

Identifiers

PMID33934301
OpenAlexW3159789796

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.