ArticleScientific data2025
Downscaled global 60-meter resolution estimates of irrigation water sources (2000-2015).
Article in Scientific data, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This dataset provides high-resolution (60 m) global irrigation maps to support water resource and agricultural management. It identifies the likely irrigation status (rainfed or irrigated) and water source (groundwater or surface water) of croplands for 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015. We downscaled a 10-km irrigation dataset derived from national and subnational statistics (GMIA) using (i) spatial patterns between high-resolution (30 m) cropland and nearby surface water, and (ii) irrigation water requirements from a global crop model. Validation used household agriculture surveys in India (N = 8,355) and a U.S. well database (N = 1,505,371). In the U.S., our method achieved 85% accuracy in distinguishing groundwater use within 2 km of wells - substantially higher than GMIA (25%). In India's groundwater-dominated regions, our estimates performed comparably to GMIA (73% vs. 72%). These results suggest our dataset offers a more accurate and spatially detailed representation of irrigation water sources, enabling improved analysis of agricultural water use.
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.