Allen, M. et al. Technical Summary: Global Warming of 1.5 C. An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5 C Above Pre-Industrial Levels and Related Global Greenhouse Gas Emission Pathways, in the Context of Strengthening the Global Response to the Threat of Climate Change, Sustainable Development, and Efforts to Eradicate Poverty (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2019).
Houghton, J. T. Climate Change 1994: Radiative Forcing of Climate Change and an Evaluation of the IPCC 1992 IS92 Emission Scenarios (Cambridge University Press, 1995).
Jackson, R. et al. Human activities now fuel two-thirds of global methane emissions. Environ. Res. Lett. 19, 101002 (2024).
Shindell, D. et al. Global Methane Assessment: Benefits and Costs of Mitigating Methane Emissions (United Nations Environment Programme and Climate and Clean Air Coalition, 2021).
IPCC. IPCC (Cambridge University Press, 1990).
Masson-Delmotte, V. et al. Climate change 2021: the physical science basis. Contrib. Work. Group Sixth Assess. Rep. Intergov. Panel Clim. Change 2, 2391 (2021).
Jackson, R. B. et al. Increasing anthropogenic methane emissions arise equally from agricultural and fossil fuel sources. Environ. Res. Lett. 15, 071002 (2020).
Nisbet, E. G. et al. Very strong atmospheric methane growth in the 4 years 2014–2017: implications for the Paris agreement. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 33, 318–342 (2019).
Saunois, M. et al. The global methane budget 2000–2017. Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss. 2019, 1–136 (2019).
Jones, M. W. et al. National contributions to climate change due to historical emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide since 1850. Sci. Data 10, 155 (2023).
Jones, M. W. et al. National contributions to climate change due to historical emissions of carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide. Zenodo https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.14054503 (2024).
Qian, H. et al. Greenhouse gas emissions and mitigation in rice agriculture. Nat. Rev. Earth Environ. 4, 716–732 (2023).
Prinn, R. Ozone, hydroxyl radical, and oxidative capacity. In Treatise on Geochemistry, 2nd edn, Vol. 5 (eds. Holland, H. D. & Turekian, K. K.) 1–19 (Elsevier, 2014).
Singh, A. et al. Biogenic link to the recent increase in atmospheric methane over India. J. Environ. Manag. 289, 112526 (2021).
Tian, Z. et al. Searching for “Win-Win” solutions for food-water-GHG emissions tradeoffs across irrigation regimes of paddy rice in China. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 166, 105360 (2021).
Reay, D. S., Smith, P., Christensen, T. R., James, R. H. & Clark, H. Methane and global environmental change. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 43, 165–192 (2018).
Smith, P., Reay, D. & Smith, J. U. Agricultural methane emissions and the potential formitigation. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 379, 20200451 (2021).
Conrad, R. Importance of hydrogenotrophic, aceticlastic and methylotrophic methanogenesis for methane production in terrestrial, aquatic and other anoxic environments: a mini review. Pedosphere 30, 25–39 (2020).
Beegum, S., Burra, K., Das, S., Kapoor, A. & Ray, C. Challenges in mechanistic modeling of methane production and release in agricultural soils: perspective on limitations and opportunities. Crit. Rev. Environ. Sci. Technol. 56, 375–406 (2026).
FAO, F. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data (2022).
Islam, S. F. et al. Mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions and reduced irrigation water use in rice production through water-saving irrigation scheduling, reduced tillage and fertiliser application strategies. Sci. Total Environ. 739, 140215 (2020).
Wang, S. et al. Strategies to reduce CH4 and N2O emissions whilst maintaining crop yield in rice–wheat system under climate change using SPACSYS model. Agric. Syst. 226, 104337 (2025).
Carlson, K. M. et al. Greenhouse gas emissions intensity of global croplands. Nat. Clim. Change 7, 63–68 (2017).
Linquist, B., Van Groenigen, K. J., Adviento-Borbe, M. A., Pittelkow, C. & Van Kessel, C. An agronomic assessment of greenhouse gas emissions from major cereal crops. Glob. Change Biol. 18, 194–209 (2012).
Liu, Y. et al. Rice paddy soils are a quantitatively important carbon store according to a global synthesis. Commun. Earth Environ. 2, 154 (2021).
Stocker, T. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis: Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (Cambridge University Press, 2014).
Zhang, W., Sun, W. & Li, T. Uncertainties in the national inventory of methane emissions from rice cultivation: field measurements and modeling approaches. Biogeosciences 14, 163–176 (2017).
Shindell, D. et al. Simultaneously mitigating near-term climate change and improving human health and food security. Science 335, 183–189 (2012).
Smith, S. J. & Mizrahi, A. Near-term climate mitigation by short-lived forcers. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, 14202–14206 (2013).
Ravishankara, A. et al. Global Methane Assessment: Benefits and Costs of Mitigating Methane Emissions (United Nations Environment Programme and Climate and Clean Air Coalition, 2021).
Cusworth, D. H. et al. A Bayesian framework for deriving sector-based methane emissions from top-down fluxes. Commun. Earth Environ. 2, 242 (2021).
Desjardins, R. et al. The challenge of reconciling bottom-up agricultural methane emissions inventories with top-down measurements. Agric. For. Meteorol. 248, 48–59 (2018).
Lu, X. et al. Methane emissions in the United States, Canada, and Mexico: evaluation of national methane emission inventories and 2010–2017 sectoral trends by inverse analysis of in situ (GLOBALVIEWplus CH 4 ObsPack) and satellite (GOSAT) atmospheric observations. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 22, 395–418 (2022).
Petrescu, A. M. R. et al. Comparison of observation-and inventory-based methane emissions for eight large global emitters. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 16, 4325–4350 (2024).
Wu, X. et al. Advances in methane emissions from agricultural sources: part I. Accounting and mitigation. J. Environ. Sci. 140, 279–291 (2024).
Allan, R. P. et al. IPCC. In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds. Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) 3–32 (Cambridge University Press, 2023).
Crippa, M. et al. Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nat. Food 2, 198–209 (2021).
Yan, X., Akiyama, H., Yagi, K. & Akimoto, H. Global estimations of the inventory and mitigation potential of methane emissions from rice cultivation conducted using the 2006 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Guidelines. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 23, https://doi.org/10.1029/2008GB003299 (2009).
Forbrich, I. et al. Three decades of wetland methane surface flux modeling by Earth system models-advances, applications, and challenges. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 129, e2023JG007915 (2024).
Hu, Q. et al. Global methane emissions from rice paddies: CH4MOD model development and application. iScience 27, 111237 (2024).
Ito, A. & Inatomi, M. Use of a process-based model for assessing the methane budgets of global terrestrial ecosystems and evaluation of uncertainty. Biogeosciences 9, 759–773 (2012).
Khalil, M. A. K. & Rasmussen, R. Constraints on the global sources of methane and an analysis of recent budgets. Tellus B 42, 229–236 (1990).
Kirschke, S. et al. Three decades of global methane sources and sinks. Nat. Geosci. 6, 813–823 (2013).
Saunois, M. et al. Global methane budget 2000–2020. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 17, 1873–1958 (2025).
Xu, X. et al. Reviews and syntheses: four decades of modeling methane cycling in terrestrial ecosystems. Biogeosciences 13, 3735–3755 (2016).
Zhang, B. et al. Methane emissions from global rice fields: magnitude, spatiotemporal patterns, and environmental controls. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 30, 1246–1263 (2016).
Inubushi, K. Sustainable soil management in East, South and Southeast Asia. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 67, 1–9 (2021).
Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO). FAOSTAT https://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data (2025).
Hamed, K. H. & Rao, A. R. A modified Mann-Kendall trend test for autocorrelated data. J. Hydrol. 204, 182–196 (1998).
Hussain, M. & Mahmud, I. pyMannKendall: a Python package for non parametric Mann Kendall family of trend tests. J. Open Source Softw. 4, 1556 (2019).
Pohlert, T. Non-parametric trend tests and change-point detection. CC -ND 4, 1–18 (2016).
Sen, P. K. Estimates of the regression coefficient based on Kendall’s tau. J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 63, 1379–1389 (1968).
Lorente, A. et al. Methane retrieved from TROPOMI: improvement of the data product and validation of the first 2 years of measurements. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 14, 665–684 (2021).
Chen, Z. et al. Methane emissions from China: a high-resolution inversion of TROPOMI satellite observations. Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss. 2022, 1–31 (2022).
Hu, H. et al. Toward global mapping of methane with TROPOMI: first results and intersatellite comparison to GOSAT. Geophys. Res. Lett. 45, 3682–3689 (2018).
Kozicka, K., Gozdowski, D. & Wójcik-Gront, E. Spatial-temporal changes of methane content in the atmosphere for selected countries and regions with high methane emission from rice cultivation. Atmosphere 12, 1382 (2021).
Apituley, A. et al. Sentinel-5 precursor/TROPOMI level 2 product user manual methane https://sentinels.copernicus.eu/documents/247904/2474726/Sentinel-5P-Level-2-Product-User-Manual-Methane.pdf (SRON, 2021).
Lorente, A. et al. Evaluation of the methane full-physics retrieval applied to TROPOMI ocean sun glint measurements. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 15, 6585–6603 (2022).
Xie, H. et al. GloRice, a global rice database (v1. 0): I. Gridded paddy rice annual distribution from 1961 to 2021. Sci. Data 12, 182 (2025).
Fan, L. et al. Anaerobic oxidation of methane in paddy soil: role of electron acceptors and fertilization in mitigating CH4 fluxes. Soil Biol. Biochem. 141, 107685 (2020).
Fumoto, T., Kobayashi, K., Li, C., Yagi, K. & Hasegawa, T. Revising a process-based biogeochemistry model (DNDC) to simulate methane emission from rice paddy fields under various residue management and fertilizer regimes. Glob. Change Biol. 14, 382–402 (2008).
Van Bodegom, P. & Stams, A. Effects of alternative electron acceptors and temperature on methanogenesis in rice paddy soils. Chemosphere 39, 167–182 (1999).
Mo, D. et al. Warming increases CH4 emissions from rice paddies through shifts in methanogenic and methanotrophic communities. Soil Biol. Biochem. 200, 109639 (2025).
Minamikawa, K. et al. Potential of prolonged midseason drainage for reducing methane emission from rice paddies in Japan: a long-term simulation using the DNDC-Rice model. Biol. Fertil. Soils 50, 879–889 (2014).
Rizzo, A., Boano, F., Revelli, R. & Ridolfi, L. Role of water flow in modeling methane emissions from flooded paddy soils. Adv. Water Resour. 52, 261–274 (2013).
Rizzo, A., Boano, F., Revelli, R. & Ridolfi, L. Decreasing of methanogenic activity in paddy fields via lowering ponding water temperature: a modeling investigation. Soil Biol. Biochem. 75, 211–222 (2014).
IPCC. 2019 refinement to the 2006 IPCC guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories. Agric. For. Land Use 4, 824 (2019).
Malyan, S. K. et al. Methane production, oxidation and mitigation: a mechanistic understanding and comprehensive evaluation of influencing factors. Sci. Total Environ. 572, 874–896 (2016).
Nikolaisen, M. et al. Methane emissions from rice paddies globally: a quantitative statistical review of controlling variables and modelling of emission factors. J. Clean. Prod. 409, 137245 (2023).
Yan, X., Ohara, T. & Akimoto, H. Development of region-specific emission factors and estimation of methane emission from rice fields in the East, Southeast and South Asian countries. Glob. Change Biol. 9, 237–254 (2003).
Nikolaisen, M., Hillier, J., Smith, P. & Nayak, D. Modelling CH4 emission from rice ecosystem: a comparison between existing empirical models. Front. Agron. 4, 1058649 (2023).
Nisbet, E. et al. Methane mitigation: methods to reduce emissions, on the path to the Paris agreement. Rev. Geophys. 58, e2019RG000675 (2020).
Qu, Z. et al. Global distribution of methane emissions: a comparative inverse analysis of observations from the TROPOMI and GOSAT satellite instruments. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 21, 14159–14175 (2021).
Bernard, J. et al. Development of a global and dynamic map of wetland and inundated areas based on microwave remote sensing product (GIEMS-2) over 1992-2020. https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu24-10126 (2025).
Suepa, T., Qi, J. & Lawawirojwong, S. Integrations remote sensing mapping with the environmental model to quantify emissions from rice paddies in Thailand. In 2013 Second International Conference on Agro-Geoinformatics (Agro-Geoinformatics) 42–47 (IEEE, 2013).
Tamilmounika, R. et al. Quantifying methane emissions in major rice growing areas of Tamil Nadu using remote sensing and land surface temperature model. Plant Sci. Today 11, 5604 (2024).
Torbick, N., Salas, W., Chowdhury, D., Ingraham, P. & Trinh, M. Mapping rice greenhouse gas emissions in the Red River Delta, Vietnam. Carbon Manag. 8, 99–108 (2017).
Jacob, D. J. et al. Quantifying methane emissions from the global scale down to point sources using satellite observations of atmospheric methane. Atmos. Chem. Phys. Discuss. 2022, 1–44 (2022).
Duren, R. M. et al. California’s methane super-emitters. Nature 575, 180–184 (2019).
Bridhikitti, A. & Overcamp, T. J. Estimation of Southeast Asian rice paddy areas with different ecosystems from moderate-resolution satellite imagery. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 146, 113–120 (2012).
Chen, Z. et al. Global rice paddy inventory (GRPI): a high-resolution inventory of methane emissions from rice agriculture based on Landsat satellite inundation data. Earths Future 13, e2024EF005479 (2025).
Jang, J., Kim, G., Sim, J., Kim, J. & Lee, Y. Machine learning-based mapping of daily methane concentration in rice paddies using meteorological data and satellite images: a case of South Korea. Korean J. Remote Sens. 40, 1095–1108 (2024).
Liang, R. et al. Satellite-based monitoring of methane emissions from China’s rice hub. Environ. Sci. Technol. 58, 23127–23137 (2024).
Prigent, C., Papa, F., Aires, F., Rossow, W. B. & Matthews, E. Global inundation dynamics inferred from multiple satellite observations, 1993–2000. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 112, D12107 (2007).
Sun, M. et al. Satellite data based estimation of methane emissions from rice paddies in the Sanjiang Plain in northeast China. PLoS ONE 12, e0176765 (2017).
Ciais, P. et al. Atmospheric inversions for estimating CO2 fluxes: methods and perspectives. Clim. Change 103, 69–92 (2010).
Palmer, P. I. et al. The added value of satellite observations of methane forunderstanding the contemporary methane budget. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. A 379, 20210106 (2021).
Bergamaschi, P. et al. Satellite chartography of atmospheric methane from SCIAMACHY on board ENVISAT: 2. Evaluation based on inverse model simulations. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 112, D02304 (2007).
Straume, A. et al. The global variation of CH4 and CO as seen by SCIAMACHY. Adv. Space Res. 36, 821–827 (2005).
Aumann, H. H. et al. AIRS/AMSU/HSB on the Aqua mission: design, science objectives, data products, and processing systems. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens. 41, 253–264 (2003).
Xiong, X. et al. Characterization and validation of methane products from the Atmospheric Infrared Sounder (AIRS). J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 113, G00A01 (2008).
Kuze, A., Suto, H., Shiomi, K., Nakajima, M. & Hamazaki, T. On-orbit performance and level 1 data processing of TANSO-FTS and CAI on GOSAT. In Sensors, Systems, and Next-Generation Satellites XIII Vol. 7474, 151–158 https://doi.org/10.1117/12.830152 (SPIE, 2009).
Kuze, A. et al. Update on GOSAT TANSO-FTS performance, operations, and data products after more than 6 years in space. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 9, 2445–2461 (2016).
Kuze, A. et al. Detection of methane emission from a local source using GOSAT target observations. Remote Sens. 12, 267 (2020).
Suto, H. et al. Thermal and near-infrared sensor for carbon observation Fourier-transform spectrometer-2 (TANSO-FTS-2) on the Greenhouse Gases Observing Satellite-2 (GOSAT-2) during its first year on orbit. Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss. 2020, 1–51 (2020).
Futami, M. et al. Development and ground performance evaluation of the TANSO-3 for the GOSAT-GW satellite. in Vol. 13667, 273–282 (SPIE, 2025).
Tanimoto, H. et al. The greenhouse gas observation mission with Global Observing SATellite for Greenhouse gases and Water cycle (GOSAT-GW): objectives, conceptual framework and scientific contributions. Prog. Earth Planet. Sci. 12, 1–33 (2025).
Chan Miller, C. et al. Methane retrieval from MethaneAIR using the CO2 proxy approach: a demonstration for the upcoming MethaneSAT mission. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 17, 5429–5454 (2024).
Hamburg, S., Gautam, R. & Zavala-Araiza, D. MethaneSAT—a new tool purpose-built to measure oil and gas methane emissions from space. In Abu Dhabi International Petroleum Exhibition and Conference D011S007R002 (SPE, 2022).
Crowell, S. & Moore, B. The GeoCarb mission: persistent greenhouse gas column observations from geostationary orbit over the Americas. AGU Fall Meet. Abstr. 2024, A11R-1915 (2024).
McGarragh, G. R. et al. The GeoCarb greenhouse gas retrieval algorithm: simulations and sensitivity to sources of uncertainty. Atmos. Meas. Tech. Discuss. 2023, 1–52 (2023).
Moore III, B. & Crowell, S. Geostationary Carbon Cycle Observatory (GeoCarb): unraveling the carbon-weather-climate system. AGU Fall Meet. Abstr. 2020, A247-02 (2020).
Courrèges-Lacoste, G. B. et al. Progress on the development of the Copernicus CO2M mission. In Sensors, Systems, and Next-Generation Satellites XXVIII Vol. 13192, 185–199 (SPIE, 2024).
Lang, R. & Meijer, Y. The Copernicus anthropogenic CO2 monitoring (CO2M) mission-status and first results from product development. AGU Fall Meet. Abstr. 2024, A23P-08 (2024).
Reuter, M. et al. Retrieving the atmospheric concentrations of carbon dioxide and methane from the European Copernicus CO2M satellite mission using artificial neural networks. Atmos. Meas. Tech. 18, 241–264 (2025).
Zhu, T. et al. Divergent responses of CH4 emissions and uptake to global change drivers. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 39, e2024GB008183 (2025).
Bi, H. & Neethirajan, S. Mapping methane—The impact of dairy farm practices on emissions through satellite data and machine learning. Climate 12, 223 (2024).
Clark, R., Dahlhaus, P., Robinson, N., Larkins, J. & Morse-McNabb, E. Matching the model to the available data to predict wheat, barley, or canola yield: a review of recently published models and data. Agric. Syst. 211, 103749 (2023).
Evangelista, C., Milanesi, M., Pietrucci, D., Chillemi, G. & Bernabucci, U. Enteric methane emission in livestock sector: bibliometric research from 1986 to 2024 with text mining and topic analysis approach by machine learning algorithms. Animals 14, 3158 (2024).
Louime, C. J. & Raza, T. A. Development of artificial intelligence/machine learning (AI/ML) Models for methane emissions forecasting in seaweed. Methane 3, 485–499 (2024).
Sima, M., Fang, Q., Qi, Z. & Yu, Q. Direct assimilation of measured soil water content in Root Zone Water Quality Model calibration for deficit-irrigated maize. Agron. J. 112, 844–860 (2020).
Bridgham, S. D., Cadillo-Quiroz, H., Keller, J. K. & Zhuang, Q. Methane emissions from wetlands: biogeochemical, microbial, and modeling perspectives from local to global scales. Glob. Change Biol. 19, 1325–1346 (2013).
Chandel, A. K., Jiang, L. & Luo, Y. Microbial models for simulating soil carbon dynamics: a review. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 128, e2023JG007436 (2023).
Wieder, W. R. et al. Explicitly representing soil microbial processes in Earth system models. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 29, 1782–1800 (2015).
Chang, K.-Y., Riley, W. J., Crill, P. M., Grant, R. F. & Saleska, S. R. Hysteretic temperature sensitivity of wetland CH4 fluxes explained by substrate availability and microbial activity. Biogeosciences 17, 5849–5860 (2020).
Chang, K.-Y. et al. Substantial hysteresis in emergent temperature sensitivity of global wetland CH4 emissions. Nat. Commun. 12, 2266 (2021).
Del Grosso, S. J., Mosier, A. R., Parton, W. J. & Ojima, D. S. DAYCENT model analysis of past and contemporary soil N2O and net greenhouse gas flux for major crops in the USA. Soil Tillage Res. 83, 9–24 (2005).
Katayanagi, N. et al. Estimation of total CH4 emission from Japanese rice paddies using a new estimation method based on the DNDC-Rice simulation model. Sci. Total Environ. 601, 346–355 (2017).
Li, H. et al. The development of China-DNDC and review of its applications for sustaining Chinese agriculture. Ecol. Model. 348, 1–13 (2017).
Tang, Y. et al. Quantifying greenhouse gas emissions in agricultural systems: a comparative analysis of process models. Ecol. Model. 490, 110646 (2024).
Bingham, I. J. & Wu, L. Simulation of wheat growth using the 3D root architecture model SPACSYS: validation and sensitivity analysis. Eur. J. Agron. 34, 181–189 (2011).
Samal, P., Babu, S. C., Mondal, B. & Mishra, S. N. The global rice agriculture towards 2050: an inter-continental perspective. Outlook Agric. 51, 164–172 (2022).
Wang, J. et al. The role of rice cultivation in changes in atmospheric methane concentration and the Global Methane Pledge. Glob. Change Biol. 29, 2776–2789 (2023).
Minamikawa, K. et al. Prediction of future methane emission from irrigated rice paddies in central Thailand under different water management practices. Sci. Total Environ. 566, 641–651 (2016).
Paramitha, I. G. A. A. P. Mitigating atmospheric methane emissions from Asian rice fields: a review of potential and promising technical options. LIMNOTEK Perair. Darat Trop. Indones. 29, 1–10 https://doi.org/10.55981/limnotek.2023.913 (2023).
Ringler, C., Mekonnen, D. K., Xie, H. & Uhunamure, A. M. Irrigation to transform agriculture and food systems in Africa South of the Sahara. In 2020 Annual Trends and Outlook Report: Sustaining Africa’s Agrifood System Transformation: The Role of Public Policies (eds. Resnick, D., Diao, X. & Tadesse, G.) 57–70 (International Food Policy Research Institute & AKADEMIYA2063, 2020).
Harmon, G., Jepson, W. & Lefore, N. Farmer-led irrigation development in sub-Saharan Africa. Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Water 10, e1631 (2023).
Villa-Cox, G., Herrera, P., Villa-Cox, R. & Merino-Gaibor, E. Small and mid-sized farmer irrigation adoption in the context of public provision of hydric infrastructure in Latin America and Caribbean. Water Resour. Manag. 31, 4617–4631 (2017).
Nhamo, L. et al. Why do farmers not irrigate all the areas equipped for irrigation? Lessons from Southern Africa. Agriculture 14, 1218 (2024).
Crippa, M. et al. GHG emissions of all world countries. Publication 10, 953322 (2023).
Crippa, M. et al. Insights into the spatial distribution of global, national, and subnational greenhouse gas emissions in the Emissions Database for Global Atmospheric Research (EDGAR v8. 0). Earth Syst. Sci. Data 16, 2811–2830 (2024).
Höglund-Isaksson, L., Gómez-Sanabria, A., Klimont, Z., Rafaj, P. & Schöpp, W. Technical potentials and costs for reducing global anthropogenic methane emissions in the 2050 timeframe–results from the GAINS model. Environ. Res. Commun. 2, 025004 (2020).
NOAA Global Monitoring Laboratory. Trends in Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide https://gml.noaa.gov/ccgg/trends/ (NOAA, 2025).
US-EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks (US EPA, 2025).
Thai, V. T. et al. Producing more rice with fewer emissions: a global meta-analysis. Npj Sustain. Agric. 4, 27 (2026).
Crippa, M. et al. Gridded emissions of air pollutants for the period 1970–2012 within EDGAR v4. 3.2. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 10, 1987–2013 (2018).
US EPA. User’s Guide for Estimating Carbon Dioxide, Methane, And Nitrous Oxide Emissions from Agriculture Using the State Inventory Tool. https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2024-02/ag-module-users-guide_508.pdf#:~:text=Thus%2C%20the%20method%20for%20estimating%20emissions%20is,amount%20of%20CH4%20emitted%20per%20flooding%20season. (2024).
Ahmad, A., Zoli, M., Latella, C. & Bacenetti, J. Rice cultivation and processing: highlights from a life cycle thinking perspective. Sci. Total Environ. 871, 162079 (2023).
Fang, H. et al. A comprehensive review of rice mapping from satellite data: algorithms, product characteristics and consistency assessment. Sci. Remote Sens. 10, 100172 (2024).
Khatibi, S. M. H., Adviento-Borbe, M. A., Dimaano, N. G., Radanielson, A. M. & Ali, J. Advanced technologies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from rice fields: is hybrid rice the game changer? Plant Commun. 6, 101224 (2025).
Ginting, F. I. et al. High-resolution maps of rice cropping intensity across Southeast Asia. Sci. Data 12, 1408 (2025).
Yin, X. et al. Developments and prospects of multiple cropping in China. Farming Syst. 2, 100083 (2024).
Liu, Y. et al. Direct-seeded rice reduces methane emissions by improving root physiological characteristics through affecting the water status of paddy fields. Rhizosphere 24, 100628 (2022).
Xuan, T. D., Minh, T. T. N., Rayee, R., Dong, N. D. & Chien, N. X. Advances in mitigating methane emissions from rice cultivation: past, present, and future strategies. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 32, 20232–20247 (2025).
Maasakkers, J. D. et al. Global distribution of methane emissions, emission trends, and OH concentrations and trends inferred from an inversion of GOSAT satellite data for 2010–2015. Atmos. Chem. Phys. 19, 7859–7881 (2019).
Turner, A. J., Frankenberg, C. & Kort, E. A. Interpreting contemporary trends in atmospheric methane. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 116, 2805–2813 (2019).
Zhang, Y. et al. Quantifying methane emissions from the largest oil-producing basin in the United States from space. Sci. Adv. 6, eaaz5120 (2020).
Prajesh, P. J., Ragunath, K. & Neethirajan, S. Satellite remote sensing and artificial intelligence for livestock greenhouse gas benchmarking: measurement, attribution, and verification challenges. Environ. Sci. Adv. 5, 941–965 (2026).
Koyama, T. Gaseous metabolism in lake sediments and paddy soils and the production of atmospheric methane and hydrogen. J. Geophys. Res. 68, 3971–3973 (1963).
Anastasi, C., Dowding, M. & Simpson, V. Future CH4 emissions from rice production. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 97, 7521–7525 (1992).
Canadell, J. G. et al. Global carbon and other biogeochemical cycles and feedbacks. In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (eds. Masson-Delmotte, V. et al.) 673–816 (Cambridge University Press, 2021).
Ciais, P. et al. Carbon and other biogeochemical cycles. In Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Change (eds. Stocker, T. F. et al.) 465–570 https://www.ipcc.ch/site/assets/uploads/2018/07/WGI_AR5.Chap_.6_SM.1.14.14.pdf (Cambridge University Press, 2014).
Bo, Y., Liang, H., Li, T. & Zhou, F. Process-based modeling framework for sustainable irrigation management at the regional scale: integrating rice production, water use, and greenhouse gas emissions. Geosci. Model Dev. Discuss. 2024, 1–29 (2024).
Cai, Z. et al. Field validation of the DNDC model for greenhouse gas emissions in East Asian cropping systems. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 17, 1107 (2003).
Chen, H. et al. Modeling the impacts of water and fertilizer management on the ecosystem service of rice rotated cropping systems in China. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 219, 49–57 (2016).
Li, C., Frolking, S. & Frolking, T. A. A model of nitrous oxide evolution from soil driven by rainfall events: 1. Model structure and sensitivity. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 97, 9759–9776 (1992).
Li, C. et al. Comparing a process-based agro-ecosystem model to the IPCC methodology for developing a national inventory of N2O emissions from arable lands in China. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 60, 159–175 (2001).
Cheng, K., Ogle, S. M., Parton, W. J. & Pan, G. Predicting methanogenesis from rice paddies using the DAYCENT ecosystem model. Ecol. Model. 261, 19–31 (2013).
Del Grosso, S. et al. Simulated interaction of carbon dynamics and nitrogen trace gas fluxes using the DAYCENT model. Model. Carbon Nitrogen Dyn. Soil Manag. 303, 332 (2001).
Parton, W. J., Ojima, D. S., Cole, C. V. & Schimel, D. S. A general model for soil organic matter dynamics: sensitivity to litter chemistry, texture and management. Quant. Model. Soil Form. Process. 39, 147–167 (1994).
Parton, W. J., Hartman, M., Ojima, D. & Schimel, D. DAYCENT and its land surface submodel: description and testing. Glob. Planet. Change 19, 35–48 (1998).
Fumoto, T. Process-based modeling of methane emissions from rice fields. Bull. NARO Agro-Environ. Sci. N. 38, 1 (2017).
Huang, Y., Zhang, W., Zheng, X., Li, J. & Yu, Y. Modeling methane emission from rice paddies with various agricultural practices. J. Geophys. Res. Atmos. 109, D08113 (2004).
Huang, Y., Sass, R. L. & Fisher, F. M. A semi-empirical model of methane emission from flooded rice paddy soils. Glob. Change Biol. 4, 247–268 (1998).
Xie, B., Zhou, Z., Zheng, X., Zhang, W. & Zhu, J. Modeling methane emissions from paddy rice fields under elevated atmospheric carbon dioxide conditions. Adv. Atmos. Sci. 27, 100–114 (2010).
Arah, J., Bronson, K., Alberto, M., Abao, E. & Neue, H. A Simple process-based model to predict methane emission from flooded fields. https://cgspace.cgiar.org/items/56ba07c1-0437-4859-86de-85d1545e6121 (1994).
Matthews, R., Wassmann, R. & Arah, J. Using a crop/soil simulation model and GIS techniques to assess methane emissions from rice fields in Asia. I. Model development. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 58, 141–159 (2000).
Matthews, R., Wassmann, R., Buendia, L. & Knox, J. Using a crop/soil simulation model and GIS techniques to assess methane emissions from rice fields in Asia. II. Model validation and sensitivity analysis. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 58, 161–177 (2000).
Tian, H. et al. DLEM-The Dynamic Land Ecosystem Model, User Manual (ESRA Ecosystem Science Regional Laboratory, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, 2005).
Zhang, J., Tian, H., Yang, J. & Pan, S. Improving representation of crop growth and yield in the dynamic land ecosystem model and its application to China. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst. 10, 1680–1707 (2018).
Darikandeh, D. et al. Optimizing rice management to reduce methane emissions and maintain yield with the CSM-CERES-rice model. Agric. Syst. 224, 104248 (2025).
Gijsman, A. J., Hoogenboom, G., Parton, W. J. & Kerridge, P. C. Modifying DSSAT crop models for low-input agricultural systems using a soil organic matter–residue module from CENTURY. Agron. J. 94, 462–474 (2002).
Hoogenboom, G. et al. The DSSAT crop modeling ecosystem. In Advances in Crop Modelling for a Sustainable Agriculture (ed. Boote, K. J.) 173–216 (Burleigh Dodds Science Publishing, 2019).
Cao, M., Dent, J. & Heal, O. Modeling methane emissions from rice paddies. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 9, 183–195 (1995).
Liang, H., Hu, K., Batchelor, W. D., Qi, Z. & Li, B. An integrated soil-crop system model for water and nitrogen management in North China. Sci. Rep. 6, 25755 (2016).
Liang, H. et al. Modeling CH4 and N2O emissions for continuous and noncontinuous flooding rice systems. Agric. Syst. 203, 103528 (2022).
Li, Y. et al. A spatially referenced water and nitrogen management model (WNMM) for (irrigated) intensive cropping systems in the North China Plain. Ecol. Model. 203, 395–423 (2007).
Cao, M., Gregson, K., Marshall, S., Dent, J. B. & Heal, O. W. Global methane emissions from rice paddies. Chemosphere 33, 879–897 (1996).
Olivier, J. G. J. & Peters, J. A. H. W. Trends in global CO2 and total greenhouse gas emissions: 2020 Report (PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, 2020).
Ellis, E. & Paustian, K. Importance of on-farm research for validating process-based models of climate-smart agriculture. Carbon Balance Manag. 19, 16 (2024).
Gabbrielli, M. et al. A review of the main process-based approaches for modeling N2O emissions from agricultural soils. Horticulturae 10, 98 (2024).
Lin, S., Zhou, N., Jahangir, J. & Sohail, S. Analyzing dynamic impacts of deagriculturalization on CO2 emissions in selected Asian economies: a tale of two shocks. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. Int. 29, 72957–72967 (2022).
Rajendran, S. et al. Methane emission from rice fields: necessity for molecular approach for mitigation. Rice Sci. 31, 159–178 (2024).
Lee, J.-H., Lee, J.-Y., Kang, Y.-G., Kim, J.-H. & Oh, T.-K. Evaluating methane emissions from rice paddies: a study on the cultivar and transplanting date. Sci. Total Environ. 902, 166174 (2023).
Bhattacharyya, P. et al. Elucidation of rice rhizosphere metagenome in relation to methane and nitrogen metabolism under elevated carbon dioxide and temperature using whole genome metagenomic approach. Sci. Total Environ. 542, 886–898 (2016).
Van Groenigen, K. J., Osenberg, C. W. & Hungate, B. A. Increased soil emissions of potent greenhouse gases under increased atmospheric CO2. Nature 475, 214–216 (2011).
Yu, H. et al. Effects of elevated CO2 concentration on CH4 and N2O emissions from paddy fields: a meta-analysis. Sci. China Earth Sci. 65, 96–106 (2022).
Jiang, Y. et al. Water management to mitigate the global warming potential of rice systems: a global meta-analysis. Field Crops Res. 234, 47–54 (2019).
Wang, J. et al. Modeling impacts of alternative practices on net global warming potential and greenhouse gas intensity from rice-wheat annual rotation in China. PLoS ONE 7, e45668 (2012).
Kim, C., Walitang, D. I. & Sa, T. Methanogenesis and methane oxidation in paddy fields under organic fertilization. Korean J. Environ. Agric. 40, 295–312 (2021).
Kim, J., Lee, S.-H., Jang, I., Jeong, S. & Kang, H. Can abundance of methanogen be a good indicator for CH4 flux in soil ecosystems? Environ. Geochem. Health 37, 1007–1015 (2015).
Liaqat, I. et al. Role of microbes in sustainable utilization of animal wastes. In Climate Changes Mitigation and Sustainable Bioenergy Harvest Through Animal Waste: Sustainable Environmental Implications of Animal Waste (ed. Arshad, M.) 385–411 (Springer, 2023).
Zhao, X. et al. Management-induced greenhouse gases emission mitigation in global rice production. Sci. Total Environ. 649, 1299–1306 (2019).
Jiao, Y., Huang, Y., Zong, L., Zheng, X. & Sass, R. L. Effects of copper concentration on methane emission from rice soils. Chemosphere 58, 185–193 (2005).
Lu, W. et al. Methane emissions and mitigation options in irrigated rice fields in southeast China. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 58, 65–73 (2000).
Bu, F. et al. Meta-analysis for quantifying carbon sequestration and greenhouse gas emission in paddy soils one year after biochar application. AGRONOMY-BASEL 12, 3065 (2022).
Chen, D., Wang, C., Shen, J., Li, Y. & Wu, J. Response of CH4 emissions to straw and biochar applications in double-rice cropping systems: insights from observations and modeling. Environ. Pollut. 235, 95–103 (2018).
Oorts, K., Merckx, R., Gréhan, E., Labreuche, J. & Nicolardot, B. Determinants of annual fluxes of CO2 and N2O in long-term no-tillage and conventional tillage systems in northern France. Soil Tillage Res. 95, 133–148 (2007).
Chakraborty, D. et al. A global analysis of alternative tillage and crop establishment practices for economically and environmentally efficient rice production. Sci. Rep. 7, 9342 (2017).
Huang, Y. et al. Greenhouse gas emissions and crop yield in no-tillage systems: a meta-analysis. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 268, 144–153 (2018).
Li, T., Huang, Y., Zhang, W. & Song, C. CH4MODwetland: a biogeophysical model for simulating methane emissions from natural wetlands. Ecol. Model. 221, 666–680 (2010).
Kai, F. M., Tyler, S. C., Randerson, J. T. & Blake, D. R. Reduced methane growth rate explained by decreased Northern Hemisphere microbial sources. Nature 476, 194–197 (2011).
Banger, K., Tian, H. & Lu, C. Do nitrogen fertilizers stimulate or inhibit methane emissions from rice fields? Glob. Change Biol. 18, 3259–3267 (2012).
Muleke, A. et al. Clarifying confusions over carbon conclusions: antecedent soil carbon drives gains realised following intervention. Glob. Environ. Change Adv. 1, 100001 (2023).
Guenet, B. et al. Can N2O emissions offset the benefits from soil organic carbon storage? Glob. Change Biol. 27, 237–256 (2021).
Huang, Y. et al. Quantitative dependence of methane emission on soil properties. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 64, 157–167 (2002).
Knox, S. H. et al. Biophysical controls on interannual variability in ecosystem-scale CO2 and CH4 exchange in a California rice paddy. J. Geophys. Res. Biogeosci. 121, 978–1001 (2016).
Iqbal, M. F. et al. Limited aerenchyma reduces oxygen diffusion and methane emission in paddy. J. Environ. Manag. 279, 111583 (2021).
Jin, Y. et al. Reducing methane emissions by developing low-fumarate high-ethanol eco-friendly rice. Mol. Plant 18, 333–349 (2025).
Wang, S., Gariepy, Y., Adekunle, A. & Raghavan, V. The role of hydroponic microbial fuel cell in the reduction of methane emission from rice plants. Electrochim. Acta 450, 142229 (2023).
Matthews, R., Wassmann, R., Knox, J. & Buendia, L. Using a crop/soil simulation model and GIS techniques to assess methane emissions from rice fields in Asia. IV. Upscaling to national levels. Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst. 58, 201–217 (2000).
Li, C. et al. Modeling impacts of farming management alternatives on CO2, CH4, and N2O emissions: a case study for water management of rice agriculture of China. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 19, GB3010 (2005).
Huang, Y., Zhang, W., Zheng, X., Han, S. & Yu, Y. Estimates of methane emissions from Chinese rice paddies by linking a model to GIS database. Acta Ecol. Sin. 26, 980–987 (2006).
Zhao, Z. et al. Modeling CH4 and N2O emission patterns and mitigation potential from paddy fields in Shanghai, China with the DNDC model. Agric. Syst. 178, 102743 (2020).
Tubiello, F. N. et al. Estimating Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Agriculture: A Manual to Address Data Requirements for Developing Countries, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome (FAO, 2015).
Zhang, W., Yu, Y., Huang, Y., Li, T. & Wang, P. Modeling methane emissions from irrigated rice cultivation in China from 1960 to 2050. Glob. Change Biol. 17, 3511–3523 (2011).
Ren, W. et al. Spatial and temporal patterns of CO2 and CH4 fluxes in China’s croplands in response to multifactor environmental changes. Tellus B Chem. Phys. Meteorol. 63, 222–240 (2011).
Zhang, J. et al. Balancing non-CO2 GHG emissions and soil carbon change in U.S. rice paddies: a retrospective meta-analysis and agricultural modeling study. AGU Adv. 5, e2023AV001052 (2024).
Li, C. et al. Reduced methane emissions from large-scale changes in water management of China’s rice paddies during 1980–2000. Geophys. Res. Lett. 29, 33−1–33–4 (2002).
Li, C. et al. Modeling greenhouse gas emissions from rice-based production systems: sensitivity and upscaling. Glob. Biogeochem. Cycles 18, GB1043 (2004).
Zhang, Y., Su, S., Zhang, F., Shi, R. & Gao, W. Characterizing spatiotemporal dynamics of methane emissions from rice paddies in northeast China from 1990 to 2010. PLoS ONE 7, e29156 (2012).
Hayano, M., Fumoto, T., Yagi, K. & Shirato, Y. National-scale estimation of methane emission from paddy fields in Japan: database construction and upscaling using a process-based biogeochemistry model. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 59, 812–823 (2013).
Cao, M., Dent, J. & Heal, O. Methane emissions from China’s paddyland. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 55, 129–137 (1995).
Ito, A., Inoue, S. & Inatomi, M. Model-based evaluation of methane emissions from paddy fields in East Asia. J. Agric. Meteorol. 78, 56–65 (2022).
Zhang, W. et al. Uncertainties in estimating regional methane emissions from rice paddies due to data scarcity in the modeling approach. Geosci. Model Dev. 7, 1211–1224 (2014).
Brilli, L. et al. Review and analysis of strengths and weaknesses of agro-ecosystem models for simulating C and N fluxes. Sci. Total Environ. 598, 445–470 (2017).
Del Grosso, S. J. et al. Approaches and concepts of modelling denitrification: increased process understanding using observational data can reduce uncertainties. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 47, 37–45 (2020).
Meng, L. et al. Sensitivity of wetland methane emissions to model assumptions: application and model testing against site observations. EGUsphere 8, 6095–6160 (2011).
Xia, T., Catalan, J., Hu, C. & Batterman, S. Development of a mobile platform for monitoring gaseous, particulate, and greenhouse gas (GHG) pollutants. Environ. Monit. Assess. 193, 7 (2021).
Reavis, C. W., Reba, M. L., Shults, D. D. & Runkle, B. R. Assessing the methane mitigation potential of innovative management in US rice production. Environ. Res. Lett. 18, 124020 (2023).
Budishchev, A. et al. Evaluation of a plot-scale methane emission model using eddy covariance observations and footprint modelling. Biogeosciences 11, 4651–4664 (2014).
McNicol, G. et al. Upscaling wetland methane emissions from the FLUXNET-CH4 eddy covariance network (UpCH4 v1. 0): model development, network assessment, and budget comparison. AGU Adv. 4, e2023AV000956 (2023).
Zhao, Z., Zhang, G., Dong, J., Yang, J. & Xiao, X. Mapping paddy rice distribution and cropping intensity in south and southeast Asia (1995–2024) at 30 m resolution. Earth Syst. Sci. Data Discuss. 2026, 1–24 (2026).
