Source

CMAS 2012 poster / TeX / poster.bib

Full commit

@article{bouwman_uncertainties_1995,
	title = {Uncertainties in the global source distribution of nitrous oxide},
	volume = {100},
	url = {http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/1995/94JD02946.shtml},
	doi = {199510.1029/94JD02946},
	number = {D2},
	urldate = {2012-07-03},
	journal = {Journal of Geophysical Research},
	author = {Bouwman, A. F. and Hoek, K. W. Van der and Olivier, J. G. J.},
	month = feb,
	year = {1995},
	pages = {PP. 2785--2800}
},

@misc{european_commission_joint_research_centre_jrc_emission_2011,
	title = {Emission Database for Global Atmospheric Research {(EDGAR)}},
	shorttitle = {Global Emissions {EDGAR} v4.2 {(November} 2011)},
	url = {http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/overview.php?v=42},
	urldate = {2012-10-11},
	author = {{{European} Commission Joint Research Centre {(JRC)}} and {{Netherlands} Environmental Assessment Agency {(PBL)}}},
	month = nov,
	year = {2011},
	howpublished = {http://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/overview.php?v=42},
	file = {EUROPA - EDGAR Overview:/home/tlroche/.zotero/zotero/20111008/zotero/storage/TJN3JRW2/overview.html:text/html}
},

@article{g._r._van_der_werf_global_2010,
	title = {Global fire emissions and the contribution of deforestation, savanna, forest, agricultural, and peat fires (1997-2009)},
	volume = {10},
	issn = {16807316},
	url = {http://www.atmos-chem-phys.net/10/11707/2010/acp-10-11707-2010.html},
	doi = {10.5194/acp-10-11707-2010},
	abstract = {New burned area datasets and top-down constraints from atmospheric concentration measurements of pyrogenic gases have decreased the large uncertainty in fire emissions estimates. However, significant gaps remain in our understanding of the contribution of deforestation, savanna, forest, agricultural waste, and peat fires to total global fire emissions. Here we used a revised version of the Carnegie-Ames-Stanford-Approach {(CASA)} biogeochemical model and improved satellite-derived estimates of area burned, fire activity, and plant productivity to calculate fire emissions for the 1997–2009 period on a 0.5° spatial resolution with a monthly time step. For November 2000 onwards, estimates were based on burned area, active fire detections, and plant productivity from the {MODerate} resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer {(MODIS)} sensor. For the partitioning we focused on the {MODIS} era. We used maps of burned area derived from the Tropical Rainfall Measuring Mission {(TRMM)} Visible and Infrared Scanner {(VIRS)} and Along-Track Scanning Radiometer {(ATSR)} active fire data prior to {MODIS} (1997–2000) and estimates of plant productivity derived from Advanced Very High Resolution Radiometer {(AVHRR)} observations during the same period. Average global fire carbon emissions according to this version 3 of the Global Fire Emissions Database {(GFED3)} were 2.0 Pg C year−1 with significant interannual variability during 1997–2001 (2.8 Pg C year−1 in 1998 and 1.6 Pg C year−1 in 2001). Globally, emissions during 2002–2007 were relatively constant (around 2.1 Pg C year−1) before declining in 2008 (1.7 Pg C year−1) and 2009 (1.5 Pg C year−1) partly due to lower deforestation fire emissions in South America and tropical Asia. On a regional basis, emissions were highly variable during 2002–2007 (e.g., boreal Asia, South America, and Indonesia), but these regional differences canceled out at a global level. During the {MODIS} era (2001–2009), most carbon emissions were from fires in grasslands and savannas (44\%) with smaller contributions from tropical deforestation and degradation fires (20\%), woodland fires (mostly confined to the tropics, 16\%), forest fires (mostly in the extratropics, 15\%), agricultural waste burning (3\%), and tropical peat fires (3\%). The contribution from agricultural waste fires was likely a lower bound because our approach for measuring burned area could not detect all of these relatively small fires. Total carbon emissions were on average 13\% lower than in our previous {(GFED2)} work. For reduced trace gases such as {CO} and {CH4}, deforestation, degradation, and peat fires were more important contributors because of higher emissions of reduced trace gases per unit carbon combusted compared to savanna fires. Carbon emissions from tropical deforestation, degradation, and peatland fires were on average 0.5 Pg C year−1. The carbon emissions from these fires may not be balanced by regrowth following fire. Our results provide the first global assessment of the contribution of different sources to total global fire emissions for the past decade, and supply the community with an improved 13-year fire emissions time series.},
	number = {23},
	urldate = {2012-10-11},
	journal = {Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics},
	author = {{{G.} R. van der Werf} and {{J.} T. Randerson} and {{L.} Giglio} and {{G.} J. Collatz} and {{M.} Mu} and {{P.} S. Kasibhatla} and {{D.} C. Morton} and {{R.} S. {DeFries}} and {{Y.} Jin} and {{T.} T. van Leeuwen}},
	year = {2010},
	pages = {11707--11735},
	file = {ACP - Abstract - Global fire emissions and the contribution of deforestation, savanna, forest, agricultural, and peat fires (1997–2009):/home/tlroche/.zotero/zotero/20111008/zotero/storage/AFAXFMH7/acp-10-11707-2010.html:text/html}
},

@article{miller_regional_2012,
	title = {Regional sources of nitrous oxide over the United States: Seasonal variation and spatial distribution},
	volume = {117},
	shorttitle = {Regional sources of nitrous oxide over the United States},
	url = {http://www.agu.org/pubs/crossref/2012/2011JD016951.shtml},
	doi = {201210.1029/2011JD016951},
	urldate = {2012-04-17},
	journal = {Journal of Geophysical Research},
	author = {Miller, S. M. and Kort, E. A. and Hirsch, A. I. and Dlugokencky, E. J. and Andrews, A. E. and Xu, X. and Tian, H. and Nehrkorn, T. and Eluszkiewicz, J. and Michalak, A. M. and Wofsy, S. C.},
	month = mar,
	year = {2012},
	pages = {13 PP.}
},

@techreport{k.w._oleson_clm3.5_2007,
	address = {Boulder, {CO}},
	title = {{CLM3.5} Documentation},
	shorttitle = {{CLM3.5} Documentation},
	url = {http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/tss/clm/distribution/clm3.5/},
	urldate = {2012-10-11},
	institution = {{UCAR}},
	author = {{{K.W.} Oleson} and {{G.-Y.} Niu} and {{Z.-L.} Yang} and {{D.M.} Lawrence} and {{P.E.} Thornton} and {{P.J.} Lawrence} and {{R.} Stockli} and {{R.E.} Dickinson} and {{G.B.} Bonan} and {{S.} Levis}},
	month = apr,
	year = {2007},
	pages = {35},
	file = {CLM3.5 Public Release Home Page:/home/tlroche/.zotero/zotero/20111008/zotero/storage/BT8ATHT2/index.html:text/html}
},

@misc{texas_agrilife_blackland_research_and_extension_center_epic_2011,
	title = {{EPIC} and {APEX} Models},
	shorttitle = {{EPIC} and {APEX} Models},
	url = {http://epicapex.brc.tamus.edu/},
	type = {text/html/images},
	abstract = {Environmental Policy Integrated Climate {(EPIC)} Model

{EPIC}, a cropping systems simulation model, was developed to estimate soil productivity as affected by erosion throughout the United States during the 1980's. It was a response to the first Resources and Conservation Act {(RCA)} appraisal conducted in 1980, which revealed a significant need for improved technology for evaluating the impacts of soil erosion on soil productivity.

{EPIC} simulates all crops with one crop growth model using unique parameter values for each crop. The processes simulated include leaf interception of solar radiation; conversion to biomass; division of biomass into roots, above ground mass, and economic yield; root growth; water use; and nutrient uptake.

{EPIC} is a field scale, daily time step model composed of physically based components for soil and crop processes such as erosion, nutrient balance, crop growth, and related processes. It is designed to simulate drainage areas that are characterized by homogeneous weather, soil, landscape, crop rotation, and management. Since the initial development, {EPIC} has been continually improving through the additions of algorithms to simulate water quality, climate change and the effect of atmospheric {CO2concentration}, and nitrogen and carbon cycling.
Agricultural {Policy/Environmental} {eXtender} {(APEX)} Model

The {APEX} model was developed to extend the {EPIC} model capabilities to whole farms and small watersheds. In addition to the {EPIC} functions, {APEX} has components for routing water, sediment, nutrients, and pesticides across complex landscapes and channel systems to the watershed outlet. {APEX} also has groundwater and reservoir components. A watershed can be subdivided as much as necessary to assure that each subarea is relatively homogeneous in terms of soil, land use, management, and weather. The routing mechanisms provide for evaluation of interactions between subareas involving surface runoff, return flow, sediment deposition and degradation, nutrient transport, and groundwater flow. Water quality in terms of nitrogen (ammonium, nitrate, and organic), phosphorus (soluble and adsorbed/mineral and organic), and pesticides concentrations {(GLEAMS} pesticide model is used to estimated pesticide fate.) may be estimated for each subarea and at the watershed outlet.},
	language = {english},
	urldate = {2012-10-11},
	author = {{{Texas} {AgriLife} Blackland Research and Extension Center}},
	month = sep,
	year = {2011},
	howpublished = {http://epicapex.brc.tamus.edu/},
	file = {Snapshot:/home/tlroche/.zotero/zotero/20111008/zotero/storage/J3KXC4QH/epicapex.brc.tamus.edu.html:text/html}
},

@article{thomson_biological_2012,
	title = {Biological sources and sinks of nitrous oxide and strategies to mitigate emissions},
	volume = {367},
	issn = {0962-8436, 1471-2970},
	url = {http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/367/1593/1157},
	doi = {10.1098/rstb.2011.0415},
	abstract = {Nitrous oxide {(N2O)} is a powerful atmospheric greenhouse gas and cause of ozone layer depletion. Global emissions continue to rise. More than two-thirds of these emissions arise from bacterial and fungal denitrification and nitrification processes in soils, largely as a result of the application of nitrogenous fertilizers. This article summarizes the outcomes of an interdisciplinary meeting, {‘Nitrous} oxide {(N2O)} the forgotten greenhouse gas’, held at the Kavli Royal Society International Centre, from 23 to 24 May 2011. It provides an introduction and background to the nature of the problem, and summarizes the conclusions reached regarding the biological sources and sinks of {N2O} in oceans, soils and wastewaters, and discusses the genetic regulation and molecular details of the enzymes responsible. Techniques for providing global and local {N2O} budgets are discussed. The findings of the meeting are drawn together in a review of strategies for mitigating {N2O} emissions, under three headings, namely: (i) managing soil chemistry and microbiology, (ii) engineering crop plants to fix nitrogen, and (iii) sustainable agricultural intensification.},
	language = {en},
	number = {1593},
	urldate = {2012-06-29},
	journal = {Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences},
	author = {Thomson, A.J. and Giannopoulos, G. and Pretty, J. and Baggs, E.M. and Richardson, D.J.},
	month = may,
	year = {2012},
	keywords = {Climate change, denitrification, greenhouse gas, mitigating emissions, nitrous oxide},
	pages = {1157--1168},
	file = {Full Text PDF:/home/tlroche/.zotero/zotero/20111008/zotero/storage/M6FD2BXR/Thomson et al. - 2012 - Biological sources and sinks of nitrous oxide and .pdf:application/pdf;Snapshot:/home/tlroche/.zotero/zotero/20111008/zotero/storage/VPJ2VWBE/1157.html:text/html}
},