Preprints
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-6468
https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2026-6468
05 Nov 2026
 | 05 Nov 2026
Status: this preprint is open for discussion and under review for Biogeosciences (BG).

Reviews and syntheses: Constraining the Nitrous Oxide (N2O) Budget Across Scales: A Critical Review of Sources, Sinks, Estimation Methods, and Knowledge Gaps

Umar Iqbal, Qiangsong Xiao, Belachew Beyene Alem, Muhammad Talal, Huifang Zhang, and Baozhang Chen

Abstract. Nitrous oxide (N₂O) budget assessments integrate evidence from microbial processes, surface flux measurements, emission inventories, and atmospheric observations, but these approaches do not necessarily constrain the same quantities. We systematically reviewed 80 peer-reviewed studies published between 2002 and 2024, using a PRISMA-based screening procedure to examine research themes, environmental systems, and estimation approaches. We additionally audited the evidence endpoints and accounting boundaries of 23 selected studies. Of the 80 studies, 53 were classified as source-focused, 22 as budget-imbalance-focused, and five as sink-focused. Although 12 studies were originally classified as top-down, six provided observation-constrained spatial emission inversions; two inferred sources through other atmospheric approaches, and four primarily examined atmospheric lifetime, transport variability, or observing-system capability. The audit also showed that microbial N₂O reduction, locally negative surface exchange, and atmospheric chemical removal are distinct quantities: evidence for one cannot, by itself, establish the magnitude of another. Some integrated assessments incorporate shared model inputs or source products, warranting caution when interpreting agreement as independent confirmation. These findings distinguish the distribution of research methods from the comparability and independence of the budget constraints they provide. Greater transparency in accounting boundaries, evidence provenance, and observational evaluation is needed to improve N₂O budget interpretation.

Publisher's note: Copernicus Publications remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims made in the text, published maps, institutional affiliations, or any other geographical representation in this paper. While Copernicus Publications makes every effort to include appropriate place names, the final responsibility lies with the authors. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.
Share
Umar Iqbal, Qiangsong Xiao, Belachew Beyene Alem, Muhammad Talal, Huifang Zhang, and Baozhang Chen

Status: open (until 17 Dec 2026)

Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
Umar Iqbal, Qiangsong Xiao, Belachew Beyene Alem, Muhammad Talal, Huifang Zhang, and Baozhang Chen
Umar Iqbal, Qiangsong Xiao, Belachew Beyene Alem, Muhammad Talal, Huifang Zhang, and Baozhang Chen
Metrics will be available soon.
Latest update: 05 Nov 2026
Download
Short summary
Nitrous oxide is a powerful greenhouse gas produced and consumed in soils and waters. We reviewed 80 studies and examined 23 in detail to ask what their findings actually reveal about its global balance. We found that microbial consumption, exchanges with the air, and removal high in the atmosphere describe different processes, while some published estimates share underlying data or models. Reliable comparisons require clearer accounting and more independent observations.
Share