ArticleNature communications2022
The impact of phosphorus on projected Sub-Saharan Africa food security futures.
Article in Nature communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Limitation of Maize Potential Yield by Phosphorus at the Global Scale.Global change biology · 2025Article
- Use of Phosphorus-Solubilizing Microorganisms as a Biotechnological Alternative: A Review.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Inorganic fertilizer use and its association with rice yield gaps in sub-Saharan Africa.Global food security · 2023Review
- Regional estimates of nitrogen budgets for agricultural systems in the East African Community over the last five decades.Agronomy for sustainable development · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sub-Saharan Africa must urgently improve food security. Phosphorus availability is one of the major barriers to this due to low historical agricultural use. Shared socioeconomic pathways (SSPs) indicate that only a sustainable (SSP1) or a fossil fuelled future (SSP5) can improve food security (in terms of price, availability, and risk of hunger) whilst nationalistic (SSP3) and unequal (SSP4) pathways worsen food security. Furthermore, sustainable SSP1 requires limited cropland expansion and low phosphorus use whilst the nationalistic SSP3 is as environmentally damaging as the fossil fuelled pathway. The middle of the road future (SSP2) maintains today's inadequate food security levels only by using approximately 440 million tonnes of phosphate rock. Whilst this is within the current global reserve estimates the market price alone for a commonly used fertiliser (DAP) would cost US$ 130 ± 25 billion for agriculture over the period 2020 to 2050 and the farmgate price could be two to five times higher due to additional costs (e.g. transport, taxation etc.). Thus, to improve food security, economic growth within a sustainability context (SSP1) and the avoidance of nationalist ideology (SSP3) should be prioritised.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.