<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE article PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing with OASIS Tables v3.0 20080202//EN" "https://jats.nlm.nih.gov/nlm-dtd/publishing/3.0/journalpub-oasis3.dtd">
<article xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:oasis="http://docs.oasis-open.org/ns/oasis-exchange/table" xml:lang="en" dtd-version="3.0" article-type="research-article">
  <front>
    <journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher">BG</journal-id><journal-title-group>
    <journal-title>Biogeosciences</journal-title>
    <abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="publisher">BG</abbrev-journal-title><abbrev-journal-title abbrev-type="nlm-ta">Biogeosciences</abbrev-journal-title>
  </journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">1726-4189</issn><publisher>
    <publisher-name>Copernicus Publications</publisher-name>
    <publisher-loc>Göttingen, Germany</publisher-loc>
  </publisher></journal-meta>
    <article-meta>
      <article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.5194/bg-23-2787-2026</article-id><title-group><article-title>Nitrous oxide emissions from pigeon pea–maize rotation in response to conservation agriculture and biochar amendments in a Ferralsol, northern Uganda</article-title><alt-title>Nitrous oxide emissions from pigeon pea–maize rotation</alt-title>
      </title-group>
      <contrib-group>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="yes" rid="aff1 aff2">
          <name><surname>Namatsheve</surname><given-names>Talent</given-names></name>
          <email>talent.namatsheve@slu.se</email><email>namatshevetalent@gmail.com</email>
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Martinsen</surname><given-names>Vegard</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Mulder</surname><given-names>Jan</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff3">
          <name><surname>Obia</surname><given-names>Alfred</given-names></name>
          
        </contrib>
        <contrib contrib-type="author" corresp="no" rid="aff1">
          <name><surname>Dörsch</surname><given-names>Peter</given-names></name>
          
        <ext-link>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4916-1839</ext-link></contrib>
        <aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><institution>Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, P.O. Box 5003, 1432 Ås, Norway</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff2"><label>2</label><institution>Department of Crop Production Ecology, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Skogsmarksgränd, vån 5, Umeå 90183, Sweden</institution>
        </aff>
        <aff id="aff3"><label>3</label><institution>Department of Agronomy, Faculty of Agriculture and Environment, Gulu University, P.O. Box 166, Gulu, Uganda</institution>
        </aff>
      </contrib-group>
      <author-notes><corresp id="corr1">Talent Namatsheve (talent.namatsheve@slu.se, namatshevetalent@gmail.com)</corresp></author-notes><pub-date><day>22</day><month>April</month><year>2026</year></pub-date>
      
      <volume>23</volume>
      <issue>8</issue>
      <fpage>2787</fpage><lpage>2802</lpage>
      <history>
        <date date-type="received"><day>23</day><month>April</month><year>2025</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-request"><day>14</day><month>May</month><year>2025</year></date>
           <date date-type="rev-recd"><day>27</day><month>March</month><year>2026</year></date>
           <date date-type="accepted"><day>30</day><month>March</month><year>2026</year></date>
      </history>
      <permissions>
        <copyright-statement>Copyright: © 2026 Talent Namatsheve et al.</copyright-statement>
        <copyright-year>2026</copyright-year>
      <license license-type="open-access"><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this licence, visit <ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</ext-link></license-p></license></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/2787/2026/bg-23-2787-2026.html">This article is available from https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/2787/2026/bg-23-2787-2026.html</self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/2787/2026/bg-23-2787-2026.pdf">The full text article is available as a PDF file from https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/2787/2026/bg-23-2787-2026.pdf</self-uri>
      <abstract><title>Abstract</title>

      <p id="d2e135">Smallholder agriculture in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) commonly involves limited use of mineral or organic fertilizer, often resulting in severe nutrient limitation. Conservation Agriculture (CA), including crop rotation with legumes and biochar amendments, has been advocated to enhance soil fertility and plant available nitrogen (N). However, CA may affect nitrous oxide (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M1" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) emissions even in unfertilized agroecosystems. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M2" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is an important greenhouse (GHG) gas, and understanding the trade-offs between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M3" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and crop yields in N-poor agroecosystems in SSA is essential. Here we studied crop yield, soil N dynamics and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M4" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in a double cropping system (pigeon pea–maize rotation) throughout two consecutive cropping seasons (April–October 2023 and October 2023–January 2024) in a Ferralsol in Northern Uganda. The study, conducted at a site which had been left fallow for 3 years, involved pairwise comparison of conventionally tilled systems under crop rotation (Conventional) and continuous maize monocropping (ConventMM). In addition, the effect of tillage systems (Conventional, CA and CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M5" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> biochar) under pigeon pea–maize rotation was investigated. We defined CA as reduced tillage with planting basins, crop rotation and residue retention, whereas conventional tillage involved overall ploughing. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M6" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes were small, ranging from 1.02–51.19 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M7" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> over the entire period. Short-lived emission peaks were observed following pigeon pea harvest in the crop rotation, which were absent in maize monocropping. Across two growing seasons, area-weighted cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M8" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions for 279 d ranged from 0.46 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M9" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M10" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC treatment to 0.88 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M11" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the Conventional treatment, respectively. CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M12" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC reduced area-weighted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M13" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions by 33 % and 66 % compared to Conventional treatment in the first and second season, respectively. In addition, biochar amendments in CA systems also reduced yield-scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M14" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions by 48 % across two seasons. In the first season, yield-scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M15" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and N yield scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M16" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions were significantly smaller in CA systems with biochar compared to conventional tillage, suggesting that CA and biochar was effective in minimising emissions without reducing pigeon pea yield, in the first year after field clearing.</p>
  </abstract>
    
<funding-group>
<award-group id="gs1">
<funding-source>Norges Forskningsråd</funding-source>
<award-id>302713</award-id>
</award-group>
<award-group id="gs2">
<funding-source>Direktoratet for Utviklingssamarbeid</funding-source>
<award-id>NORHED II NMBU, 2021-2026, QZA-21/0182</award-id>
</award-group>
</funding-group>
</article-meta>
  </front>
<body>
      

<sec id="Ch1.S1" sec-type="intro">
  <label>1</label><title>Introduction</title>
      <p id="d2e371">Nitrous oxide (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M17" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) is a long-lived greenhouse gas (GHG) with a lifetime of 116 years, and a global warming potential approximately 300 times greater than that of carbon dioxide (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M18" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Tian et al., 2020). It is the largest driver of stratospheric ozone depletion (Portmann et al., 2012). Globally, agriculture is a major source of atmospheric <inline-formula><mml:math id="M19" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, contributing approximately 60 % to global anthropogenic <inline-formula><mml:math id="M20" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (Adegbeye et al., 2020; Kim et al., 2016). In sub-Saharan Africa (SSA), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M21" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions are mainly associated with forest clearing, livestock manure, and crop production (Boateng et al., 2019; Hickman et al., 2011). Although acidic soils tend to have high <inline-formula><mml:math id="M22" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (Wang et al., 2018), the limited N inputs in smallholder farming systems in SSA reduce soil N availability, leading to low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M23" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. Only <inline-formula><mml:math id="M24" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>∼</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % of globally applied inorganic fertilizer, a key driver for soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M25" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, is used in Africa (Hickman et al., 2011). The recent 2024 Nairobi Declaration, targeting increased fertilizer use in Africa (Africa Union, 2024), might change future trajectories of fertilizer consumption in SSA, potentially increasing soil N availability and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M26" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions over time. Plant available N can also be derived from introducing legumes in crop rotations (Jensen et al., 2012), or applying organic fertilizers such as farmyard manure. These strategies are central to conservation agriculture (CA) in subsistence farming systems, but little is known about how they affect baseline <inline-formula><mml:math id="M27" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. Also, climate smart practices such as biochar amendments, have been proposed to enhance crop yield and soil fertility (Namatsheve et al., 2024; Schmidt et al., 2021) and to reduce <inline-formula><mml:math id="M28" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (Zhang et al., 2021).</p>
      <p id="d2e527">Nitrous oxide is an intermediate or by-product in soil N transformations, that include nitrification, denitrification and nitrifier denitrification (Meier et al., 2020). The biogeochemistry of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M29" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in soil is to a large extent regulated by complex interactions between environmental and biological factors such as temperature, water, carbon and nitrogen availability, oxygen levels and acidity (Case et al., 2015; Tian et al., 2020). Nitrification occurs under predominately aerobic soil conditions, whereby autotrophic bacteria or archaea oxidize <inline-formula><mml:math id="M30" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M31" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which is further oxidized to nitrite (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M32" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) by nitrate-oxidizing bacteria (Dick et al., 2008; Fungo et al., 2019). In upland soils denitrification occurs during anaerobic spells, or in anaerobic soil aggregates, and is an anoxic respiratory process mediated by bacteria and some fungi, reducing <inline-formula><mml:math id="M33" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> stepwise to N<sub>2</sub> via the intermediates NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M35" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, NO and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M36" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Saggar et al., 2013; Scheer et al., 2020). Nitrifier denitrification occurs when nitrifying bacteria reduce NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M37" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> under hypoxic conditions, analogously to the denitrification pathway (Wrage-Mönnig et al., 2018).</p>
      <p id="d2e641">In a quest to improve crop production and soil fertility, sustainable agricultural practices such as conservation agriculture (CA) and biochar amendment have been promoted in SSA (Namatsheve et al., 2024). CA is based on three core principles which are reduced tillage, crop diversification and maintenance of a soil cover (Giller et al., 2015; Hobbs et al., 2008). Minimum soil disturbance enhances water retention and soil organic matter (Pittelkow et al., 2015; Powlson et al., 2011). Crop residue retention and incorporating legumes into cereal dominated farming systems can improve soil N availability (Fang et al., 2007; Turmel et al., 2015; Namatsheve et al., 2021). Although CA may stimulate <inline-formula><mml:math id="M38" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (Abalos et al., 2022; Guenet et al., 2021; Shakoor et al., 2021), their mitigation in low-input crop production systems ultimately depends on synchronizing the release of mineral N from legumes and crop residues with the N uptake by crops.</p>
      <p id="d2e657">Biochar, a carbon rich material produced by pyrolysis of organic waste has been claimed to enhance yields in impoverished tropical soils (Cornelissen et al., 2016; Lehmann, 2007). Interest in biochar emerges from pioneering research on Brazil's <italic>Terra Preta</italic> soils, which were enriched over time by repeated application of charcoal and organic matter, resulting in soils with a stable organic matter pool (Glaser et al., 2001). Biochar tends to increase soil pH which favours N<sub>2</sub> over <inline-formula><mml:math id="M40" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> production in denitrification (Wang et al., 2018). Although biochar contributes to the retention of exchangeable plant-available <inline-formula><mml:math id="M41" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, it may also immobilize soil N (Nguyen et al., 2017), thereby reducing N availability and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M42" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission (Jeffery et al., 2015). However, Weldon et al. (2022) reported that the sorption capacity of biochar for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M43" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is low and variable, rendering <inline-formula><mml:math id="M44" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> mitigation by biochar inherently uncertain. Effect of biochar on N cycling and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M45" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in unfertilised tropical soils remains unclear (Namatsheve, 2025).</p>
      <p id="d2e752">Earlier studies reported increased <inline-formula><mml:math id="M46" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in SSA under CA (Baggs et al., 2006; Raji and Dörsch, 2020), while biochar amendments have been shown to reduce <inline-formula><mml:math id="M47" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (Fungo et al., 2017, 2019; Namoi et al., 2019). However, these studies were carried out in systems that received inorganic N fertilizers, which do not represent the realities of unfertilized smallholder tropical agroecosystems typical of Uganda and other countries in SSA. In our recent meta-analysis of CA and biochar effects on N cycling, we found that residue retention increased soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M48" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, leading to higher <inline-formula><mml:math id="M49" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions; where at least 23 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M50" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was applied (Namatsheve et al., 2024). We also found that integrating biochar into CA systems enhances biological N<sub>2</sub>-fixation of pigeon pea in unfertilized systems in Uganda (Namatsheve et al., 2025). This raises the question how the additional N from biological N<sub>2</sub>-fixation affects soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M53" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M54" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in systems with tight N cycling. As far as we know, there are no published studies that examine the synergy of CA and biochar on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M55" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in unfertilized tropical agroecosystems.</p>
      <p id="d2e885">In this study we investigated the effect of CA on grain yield, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M56" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, mineral N dynamics, and yield-scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M57" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in an unfertilized Ferralsol in northern Uganda over two consecutive cropping seasons. Specifically, we compared crop rotation (pigeon pea–maize) with maize monocropping under conventional tillage (ConventMM). We also compared pigeon pea–maize rotation under three practices: conventional tillage, CA (reduced tillage), and CA in combination with biochar (CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M58" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC). We hypothesised that rotation with pigeon pea increases <inline-formula><mml:math id="M59" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission compared to maize monocropping, while CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M60" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC reduces <inline-formula><mml:math id="M61" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, both compared to CA and to conventionally tilled soil.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2">
  <label>2</label><title>Methodology</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS1">
  <label>2.1</label><title>Site description</title>
      <p id="d2e970">A field experiment was carried out in Gulu, Northern Uganda (2°47<sup>′</sup>46<sup>′′</sup> N, 32°20<sup>′</sup>45<sup>′′</sup> E). Uganda has a bimodal rainfall pattern and eight distinct agro-ecological regions, where Gulu lies in the Northern savannah grasslands (Mubiru et al., 2012). Soils in Gulu are acric Ferralsols, and the texture is a loamy sand (Wortmann and Eledu, 1999). Average soil organic carbon (SOC) and total N are 1.52 % <inline-formula><mml:math id="M66" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>w</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>w</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and 0.11 % <inline-formula><mml:math id="M67" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>w</mml:mi><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mi>w</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, while average soil pH is 6.7 (Namatsheve et al., 2025). The research site has a double cropping system i.e., one during the first season from April to August (long rain season) and a second rain season from August to December (short rain season), and a dry period is from December to February. In this experiment, first season stretched to October because pigeon pea was harvested 6 months after planting, and second season began in October, just after harvesting pigeon pea. Mean annual rainfall in the period 1981–2010 in Gulu was 1460 mm yr<sup>−1</sup> (Oriangi et al., 2024). The annual rainfall in 2023 was 1238 mm, of which 818 mm precipitated in the first and 419 mm in the second season, respectively. Average temperature for 2023 was 24 °C. The weather data were obtained from the Gulu weather station which is about 6 km from the experimental site.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS2">
  <label>2.2</label><title>Experimental design, crop establishment and management</title>
      <p id="d2e1060">The experiment was established on a field that was fallowed for three years; before that it was used for maize and cassava production without fertilization, for at least five years. Prior to establishing the experiment, on 15 March 2023, a dense, naturally grown vegetation of grasses and shrubs was removed by slashing and chemical weeding, using glyphosate [N-(phosphonomethyl) glycine]. On 27 March 2023, plots under conventional management were prepared by overall digging using hand hoeing (100 % tillage) and plots of the same size under CA by manually digging 10 L planting basins (35 cm long <inline-formula><mml:math id="M69" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 15 cm wide <inline-formula><mml:math id="M70" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 20 cm deep) spaced 70 cm <inline-formula><mml:math id="M71" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 35 cm (interrow <inline-formula><mml:math id="M72" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> within row spacing). The plot size was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M73" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> m, and there were 63 basins in each plot, resulting in 21 000 planting basins ha<sup>−1</sup>. Given the basin dimensions about 10 %–12 % of the land under CA was tilled. The experiment had four treatments, replicated four times, and randomised in a complete block design (RCBD). The treatments were ConventMM, Conventional, CA and CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M75" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC (Table 1). Biochar was homogeneously mixed into the basins of the CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M76" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC plots when preparing the planting basins before sowing. In the treatments with crop rotation, pigeon pea was sown in the 1st season, and maize in the 2nd season. Maize monocropping had maize in both seasons. Dates of sowing and harvesting are indicated in Fig. 1a.</p>
      <p id="d2e1130">A pigeon pea variety SEPI 1 (bred at ICRISAT, Malawi and released by the National Agricultural Research Organisation, Uganda) was sown uniformly in Conventional, CA and CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M77" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC treatments. SEPI 1 is a medium maturity variety, with 77–87 d to flowering and 105–139 d to 75 % maturity. It is an indeterminate variety with semi-branching growth, the main stem continuing to elongate indefinitely; potential grain yields range from 1.8–3.4 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M78" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mg</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The maize variety, Longe 10H, which is a hybrid with 100–120 d to maturity and a yield potential of 7–9 Mg ha<sup>−1</sup> was sown in the ConventMM treatment (1st season) and in all treatments in the 2nd season. During sowing, three seeds were planted for both maize and pigeon pea at each planting station spaced 10 cm from each other giving a total planting population of 63 000 plants ha<sup>−1</sup> in all treatments. To mimic subsistence farming systems in Uganda, no inorganic fertilizer was applied. For CA, weeds were controlled by spraying glyphosate at a rate of 1.03 L ha<sup>−1</sup>, immediately after sowing and hand pulling throughout the season. Weed control in the conventional treatment was done by hand hoeing at planting and throughout the season.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS3">
  <label>2.3</label><title>Biochar production and application</title>
      <p id="d2e1202">Biochar was prepared from pigeon pea stems and twigs using the flame curtain “Kon Tiki” kiln (Cornelissen et al., 2016; Munera-Echeverri et al., 2020). The kiln consists of a conically shaped pit with a depth of 1 m and a diameter of 3 m. The pyrolysis temperature was 600 °C. After weighing, the pigeon pea feedstock was pyrolyzed, quenched with water, covered with banana leaves and soil, and recovered after 3 d. The biochar was weighed (dry matter), ground and packed. The feedstock to biochar conversion ratio was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M82" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, and the biochar had a pH of 9.74, carbon (C) concentration of 51 %, nitrogen (N) concentration of 0.76 %, cation exchange capacity (CEC) of 80.94 cmol<sub>c</sub> kg<sup>−1</sup> and plant available P of 703 mg kg<sup>−1</sup> (Table S1 in the Supplement). During biochar application, manually dug 10-L planting basins (35 cm long <inline-formula><mml:math id="M86" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 15 cm wide <inline-formula><mml:math id="M87" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 20 cm deep) spaced 70 cm <inline-formula><mml:math id="M88" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 35 cm (interrow <inline-formula><mml:math id="M89" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> within row spacing) were opened, and 240 g of dry biochar (equivalent to 1 L by volume) was thoroughly mixed with the soil in each basin for the CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M90" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC treatment. The planting basins were then covered with a thin layer of soil.</p>

<table-wrap id="T1" specific-use="star"><label>Table 1</label><caption><p id="d2e1289">Treatment description and management of the experiment site at Gulu, Northern Uganda.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="2">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="justify" colwidth="5cm"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="justify" colwidth="11cm"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">Treatment name and abbreviation</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">Treatment description and management</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">1. Conventional tillage, maize monocropping, no rotation (ConventMM)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">Shallow conventional tillage by hand hoeing (overall digging) to a depth of 10 cm (100 % tillage). Maize was grown in both seasons. Crop residues were left on the soil surface and spread evenly after harvesting. Plant spacing of 70 cm <inline-formula><mml:math id="M91" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 35 cm (interrow <inline-formula><mml:math id="M92" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> within row spacing), and planting population of 63 000 plants ha<sup>−1</sup> was used. Weed control by hand weeding during sowing and throughout the season.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">2. Conventional tillage, pigeon pea–maize rotation (Conventional)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">Shallow conventional tillage by hand hoeing (overall digging) to a depth of 10 cm (100 % tillage). Pigeon pea–maize rotation; crop residues were left on the soil surface and spread evenly after harvesting, while stems were removed from the field. Plant spacing of 70 cm <inline-formula><mml:math id="M94" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 35 cm (interrow <inline-formula><mml:math id="M95" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> within row spacing), and planting population of 63 000 plants ha<sup>−1</sup> was used. Weed control by hand weeding during sowing and throughout the season.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">3. Basins, pigeon pea–maize rotation, incorporating residues (CA)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">Manually dug 10 L sized planting basins (approximately 35 cm long, 15 cm in diameter and 20 cm deep) created by hand hoeing at the beginning of the experiment with a spacing of 70 cm <inline-formula><mml:math id="M97" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> 35 cm (interrow <inline-formula><mml:math id="M98" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> within row spacing), and planting population of 63 000 plants ha<sup>−1</sup>. Pigeon pea–maize rotation; crop residues were left on soil surface and spread evenly after harvesting. Weed control by herbicides (glyphosate) during sowing and hand pulling throughout the season.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1" align="left">4. Basins, pigeon pea–maize rotation, incorporating residues, 5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M100" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mg</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of biochar applied once (CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M101" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2" align="left">As CA, but with biochar mixed into the basins at a rate of 5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M102" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mg</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> during the first season, before sowing.</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS4">
  <label>2.4</label><title>Soil sampling and analysis for chemical characterization</title>
      <p id="d2e1479">Soils were sampled before establishing the trials in March 2023 (background sampling) for general characterisation of the research site. Using an auger, 3 samples from 0–20 cm depth were randomly taken from the experimental site and mixed into a single composite sample (Table S1). At the onset (April 2023) and end (October 2023) of the first growing season, soils were sampled plot wise (0–20 cm) from planting basins in CA and CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M103" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC treatments and in the planting rows in conventional treatments to assess the effect of different treatments on soil properties. Prior to analysis, samples from the same treatments in each of the four blocks were bulked (viz., <inline-formula><mml:math id="M104" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the onset and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M105" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>n</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> for the end for each treatment), air dried and passed through a 2 mm sieve. Soil pH was determined in water (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M106" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.5</mml:mn><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Gee and Bauder, 1986). SOC and N were analysed by a Thermo Finnigan EA attached to Isotope Ratio Mass Spectrometer (EA-IRMS).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS5">
  <label>2.5</label><title>Nitrous oxide flux sampling and analysis</title>
      <p id="d2e1534">The static chamber method was used to estimate <inline-formula><mml:math id="M107" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. We used cylindrical 20 cm high, custom-made PVC chambers manufactured from 16 cm diameter, grey opaque sewage pipes with a self-sealing rubber septum on the top for gas sampling. Permanent gas sampling plots were established by inserting 17 cm diameter PVC rings (the base) to a depth of 7 cm into the soil on 19 April 2023, 3 weeks before the first flux sampling on 10 May 2023. We installed two chamber bases in each plot. One was placed in the interrow, between two rows and another in-row between two plants within a row or in the planting basin (CA) (Figs. S1, S2 in the Supplement).</p>
      <p id="d2e1550">The chambers were deployed by carefully inserting them 3 cm into the pre-installed collars to obtain an airtight fit. To facilitate chamber deployment, the contact area between the collar and chamber was sealed with a thin layer of petroleum jelly. Each chamber covered an area of 0.020 m<sup>2</sup> and had a total headspace volume of 0.004 m<sup>3</sup>. For each flux measurement, four gas samples were drawn from the chamber headspace 1, 15, 30 and 60 min after deployment using a 20 mL polypropylene syringe equipped with a three-way valve. Collected gas samples were transferred to pre-evacuated 12 mL glass vials with crimp-sealed butyl septa. When sampling the chamber headspace, the plunger of the syringe was moved slowly in and out for three times to mix the gas and obtain a representative sample. Air and chamber temperatures were recorded before removing the chambers using a handhold thermometer which was placed inside a chamber, before and after sampling.</p>
      <p id="d2e1571">Gas sampling was done approximately biweekly, resulting in 17 sampling campaigns between May 2023 and January 2024. The vials were shipped to the Norwegian University of Life Sciences for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M110" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M111" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> analysis by gas chromatography. He-filled vials were included as blanks to check for contamination during storage and shipment of the vials. Detected concentrations of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M112" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M113" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were <inline-formula><mml:math id="M114" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> % of ambient. We used slightly over-pressured glass vials, crimp sealed with thick butyl septa, which were shown previously to maintain pressure and mixing ratios during air transport and storage (Raji and Dörsch, 2020). Therefore, storage and shipment were assumed to result in negligible changes in gas concentration of the samples. The vials were analysed on a gas chromatograph (GC; model 7890A, Agilent, Santa Clara, CA, USA) connected to an auto-sampler (Gilson). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M115" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was quantified by an electron capture detector and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M116" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> by a thermal conductivity detector as described by Žurovec et al. (2017).</p>
      <p id="d2e1657">Plotting measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M117" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M118" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations over time, revealed linear increase in most cases with little saturation observed. In some cases, the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M119" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration in the sample taken right after chamber deployment was substantially higher than 0.336 ppm (ambient <inline-formula><mml:math id="M120" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration), pointing at residual <inline-formula><mml:math id="M121" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the chamber. The exalted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M122" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentration after chamber deployment usually decreased until the second measurements (15 min) and to avoid fitting negative fluxes, the first sampling point was discarded. Flux rates were estimated by fitting a linear or second order (polynomial) function to the concentration change over time. A quadratic fit was only used in few cases in which <inline-formula><mml:math id="M123" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> accumulation in the chamber showed a convex downwards trend, i.e., decreasing emissions. Changes in gas concentrations were converted to area flux as follows:

            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E1" content-type="numbered"><label>1</label><mml:math id="M124" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>F</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mi>A</mml:mi></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mn>.60</mml:mn><mml:mo>,</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M125" display="inline"><mml:mi>F</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> is the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M126" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M127" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-N m<sup>−2</sup> h<sup>−1</sup>), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M130" display="inline"><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>c</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">d</mml:mi><mml:mi>t</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:math></inline-formula> the rate of change in concentration over time in the chamber headspace (ppm min<sup>−1</sup>), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M132" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">c</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the volume of the chamber, 0.004 m<sup>3</sup>, A the area covered by the chamber, 0.020 m<sup>2</sup>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M135" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>M</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the molar mass of N in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M136" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (g mol<sup>−1</sup>) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M138" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>V</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">n</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the molecular volume of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M139" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> or <inline-formula><mml:math id="M140" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at chamber temperature (m<sup>3</sup> mol<sup>−1</sup>). Fluxes were cumulated plot-wise by linear interpolation as kg <inline-formula><mml:math id="M143" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-N ha<sup>−1</sup> and per period) as follows:

            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E2" content-type="numbered"><label>2</label><mml:math id="M145" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext mathvariant="normal">cumulative </mml:mtext><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mo movablelimits="false">∑</mml:mo><mml:mo>[</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>f</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub><mml:mo>)</mml:mo><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">24</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mo>]</mml:mo></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M146" display="inline"><mml:mi>f</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> represents the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M147" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M148" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M149" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-N m<sup>−2</sup> h<sup>−1</sup>), <inline-formula><mml:math id="M152" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> the <inline-formula><mml:math id="M153" display="inline"><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>th measurement, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M154" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mi>i</mml:mi><mml:mo>+</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msub><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:msub><mml:mi>t</mml:mi><mml:mi>i</mml:mi></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the number of days between two subsequent measurements, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M155" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">24</mml:mn><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:msup><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was used for unit conversion. We estimated a representative flux for each plot (area-weighted cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M156" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission) by calculating area-weighted mean of fluxes from the basin and interrow positions. Weighing factors of 0.12 and 0.88 were used for basin and interrow areas, respectively, in CA treatments (CA and CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M157" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC), while a factor of 0.50 was applied to both inrow and interrow areas in conventional treatments (Conventional and ConventMM).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS6">
  <label>2.6</label><title>Soil moisture and mineral N content</title>
      <p id="d2e2284">Directly after each flux sampling, soils were sampled from both planting stations (Conventional and ConventMM) and basins (CA and CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M158" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC) and from interrow positions (all treatments), for analysing mineral N (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M159" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M160" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and soil moisture. Soils were sampled from 0–20 cm depth, using a 10 mm diameter corer with a height of 20 cm. Only one core was taken to prevent excessive perturbation, particularly in the planting basins. The cores were stored in a cooling box on ice and shipped to Gulu University which is located 5 km from the experimental site. The soil samples were extracted the same day, within 5 h after sampling. Mineral N was extracted from 11 g of field moist soil in 40 mL of 1 M potassium chloride (KCl), after 1 h of horizontal shaking at 200 strokes per minute using an automatic shaker (SHKE4450CC-1CE, USA) and passing the supernatant through Whatman filters grade 589/3. The supernatants were frozen for subsequent analysis of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M161" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M162" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> at the Norwegian University of Life Sciences by flow injection analysis (FIA star 5020, Tecator, Sweden).</p>
      <p id="d2e2346">The remaining soil was dried at 105 °C for 72 h to determine gravimetric moisture content and bulk density (BD). BD was calculated by dividing weight of oven dried soil with the volume of the soil core (15.714 cm<sup>3</sup>) and its gravimetric soil moisture content calculated by dividing weight of water (difference between fresh soil weight and oven dried soil) by the weight of oven dried soil.</p>
      <p id="d2e2358">The bulk density (BD) was then used to calculate water filled pore space (WFPS) as follows:

            <disp-formula id="Ch1.E3" content-type="numbered"><label>3</label><mml:math id="M164" display="block"><mml:mrow><mml:mtext>WFPS</mml:mtext><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="true"><mml:mfrac style="display"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mi>g</mml:mi><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mtext>BD</mml:mtext></mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mfenced open="(" close=")"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mstyle displaystyle="false"><mml:mfrac style="text"><mml:mtext>BD</mml:mtext><mml:mtext>PD</mml:mtext></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle></mml:mrow></mml:mfenced></mml:mrow></mml:mfrac></mml:mstyle><mml:mo>×</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">100</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></disp-formula>

          where <inline-formula><mml:math id="M165" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">θ</mml:mi><mml:mi>g</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is the gravimetric water content, BD the soil bulk density (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M166" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.29</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> g cm<sup>−3</sup>) and PD the soil particle density (2.65 g cm<sup>−3</sup>). Daily rainfall and temperature data were obtained from the Gulu meteorological station which is located 6 km from the experimental site.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS7">
  <label>2.7</label><title>Yield and yield-scaled emissions</title>
      <p id="d2e2453">Crops were harvested at physiological maturity, 6 months after sowing for pigeon pea and 4 months for maize. To compare crop yields under conventional and CA management and in CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M169" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC treatments, all values for dry biomass and grain (moisture content of 12.5 % for maize and 15 % for pigeon pea) were extrapolated from the plot to the hectare. Yield-scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M170" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (kg <inline-formula><mml:math id="M171" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-N kg<sup>−1</sup> grain yield) and N-yield scaled emissions (kg <inline-formula><mml:math id="M173" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-N kg<sup>−1</sup> grain N) were estimated for each season by dividing the area-weighted cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M175" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions with grain yield or N content of the grain (N concentration <inline-formula><mml:math id="M176" display="inline"><mml:mo>×</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> grain yield).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S2.SS8">
  <label>2.8</label><title>Data analysis</title>
      <p id="d2e2555">All data were analysed using R software, version 4.3.2. The full dataset is available at NMBU dataverse repository (Namatsheve et al., 2026). A random intercept, fixed slope linear mixed-effect model using the <italic>lmer</italic> function from <italic>lme4</italic> packages (Bates, 2010) with treatment, chamber position (interrow and inrow) and season as fixed factors was used to evaluate treatment effects on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M177" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and soil mineral N. On soil parameters, yield and yield-scaled emissions, fixed factors were treatments and seasons while block was a random factor (Tables S2–S13). Variation associated with chamber ID was modelled by introducing random effects to account for repeated measurement on the same chamber, on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M178" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes and soil mineral N. The most parsimonious model was selected after model comparisons based on goodness of-fit assessed by the Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and the Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC), and stepwise model reduction (Aho et al., 2014). We validated model assumptions by checking quantile plots of residuals against fitted values. Visual inspection of QQ plots showed that residuals were approximately normally distributed for cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M179" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> data, but not for daily <inline-formula><mml:math id="M180" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes. However, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M181" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux data were transformed and did not substantially improve model fit, so we retained the original scale of interpretability. Mixed-effects models are robust to mild non-normality (Zuur et al., 2009). Model parameters (estimated marginal means) were extracted using the “<italic>emmeans</italic>” package (Lenth, 2016), and multiple comparisons were performed using multcomp (Hothorn et al., 2008) with adjusted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M182" display="inline"><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula>values (Tukey post-hoc test at 0.05 probability level) (Lenth, 2016). The 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were retrieved using lsmeans function. Linear regression analyses were performed to analyse the relationship between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M183" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes with WFPS and mineral N. Visualization of the fitted models was achieved using the package ggplot2 (Wickham, 2016).</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3">
  <label>3</label><title>Results</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS1">
  <label>3.1</label><title>Soil parameters</title>
      <p id="d2e2669">Soils were near neutral with a background pH of 6.71 (Table S1). During the onset of the first season, soil pH ranged from 6.71–6.97. CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M184" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC significantly (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M185" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) increased pH compared to CA systems at the onset of the first season (Table 2). Generally, pH decreased from the beginning to the end of the first season, after which no significant (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M186" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.364</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) pH differences among treatments were found. SOC ranged from 1.25 %–2.23 % and biochar significantly (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M187" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) increased SOC, from 1.30 % in CA to 2.23 % in the CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M188" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC treatment (Table 2). At the end of the first season, CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M189" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC had significantly (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M190" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) more SOC than other non-BC treatments. Different treatments did not affect (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M191" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.57</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) soil N at the beginning and end of the first season (Table 2).</p>

<table-wrap id="T2" specific-use="star"><label>Table 2</label><caption><p id="d2e2757">Treatment effects on in-row (conventional treatments) and within planting basin (CA treatments) soil properties (pH, C, N, and BD). Soils were sampled at sowing (onset) and at the end of the first season, in Gulu, Uganda. Shown are arithmetic means with standard errors (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M192" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Lowercase letters compare treatments at onset or end of sampling, while uppercase letters compare change between samples taken at onset and end of the season. Different letters represent significant differences (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M193" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), determined at 5 % level using Tukey test.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="7">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col2" nameend="col3" align="center" colsep="1">pH </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center" colsep="1">C (%) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" namest="col6" nameend="col7" align="center">N (%) </oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Treatment</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">onset</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">end</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">onset</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">end</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">onset</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">end</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Conventional</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M194" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.64</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M195" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.36</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.10</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M196" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.41</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.06</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M197" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.31</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.07</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M198" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.11</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M199" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.10</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M200" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.61</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.08</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M201" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.35</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.07</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M202" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.30</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M203" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.25</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M204" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.10</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M205" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.09</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M206" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M207" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.97</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.13</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M208" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.28</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a B</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M209" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.23</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.27</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M210" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2.15</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.11</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M211" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.11</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M212" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.12</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">ConventMM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M213" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.71</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ab A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M214" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6.59</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M215" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.52</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.18</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M216" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.35</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.06</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M217" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.12</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M218" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.10</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.00</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M219" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M220" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">0.364</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M221" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M222" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.569</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.569</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS2">
  <label>3.2</label><title><inline-formula><mml:math id="M223" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission dynamics</title>
      <p id="d2e3296">Interaction of treatment and chamber position significantly (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M224" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) affected <inline-formula><mml:math id="M225" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission rates (Tables S2, S3). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M226" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission rates were small in all treatments throughout the entire observation period (Fig. 1a) with treatment averages ranging from 1.02–51.19 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M227" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The fluxes peaked in mid-October following pigeon pea harvest and sowing of maize. At this point in time, conventionally tilled soil with pigeon pea–maize rotation (Conventional) had the largest emissions, while conventional tillage with maize monocropping (ConventMM) showed a far less pronounced <inline-formula><mml:math id="M228" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission peak. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M229" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions levelled off towards the end of the second season, in January, coinciding with a longer dry spell (Fig. 1a).</p>

      <fig id="F1" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 1</label><caption><p id="d2e3394">Mean (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M230" display="inline"><mml:mo lspace="0mm">±</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> SE) of <bold>(a)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M231" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission fluxes, <bold>(b)</bold> KCl-extractable NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M232" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <bold>(c)</bold> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M233" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <bold>(d)</bold> WFPS, and <bold>(e)</bold> daily rainfall and air temperature (°C) during the two cropping seasons between May 2023–January 2024 in Gulu, Uganda. P1 and P2 indicate planting date for the 1st and 2nd second season (18 April 2023 and 5 October 2023, respectively). The data are based on 8 observations, average of 2 chamber positions and 4 blocks. H1 and H2 indicate harvesting dates (1 October 2023 and 30 January 2024, respectively).</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/2787/2026/bg-23-2787-2026-f01.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS3">
  <label>3.3</label><title><inline-formula><mml:math id="M234" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes and mineral N dynamics</title>
      <p id="d2e3485">Treatment-averaged <inline-formula><mml:math id="M235" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes ranged from 1.0–51.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M236" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 1a), and they were not affected by either season (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M237" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.06</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and sampling position (0.35). There was a significant relationship between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M238" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes and mineral N (NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M239" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M240" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), but with a small coefficient of determination (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M241" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M242" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Fig. S3). <inline-formula><mml:math id="M243" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ranged from 0–15 and 0–5 mg N kg<sup>−1</sup> in the 1st and 2nd season, respectively (Fig. 1b), while <inline-formula><mml:math id="M245" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ranged from 10–110 and 10–45 mg N kg<sup>−1</sup> in the first and second season, respectively (Fig. 1c). Cropping season significantly affected NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M247" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M248" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M249" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M250" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.004</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Tables S3, S4), generally, both NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M251" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M252" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were more variable in the long rain season than in the short rain season (Fig. 2). NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M253" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was not affected by treatments (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M254" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.192</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and chamber position (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M255" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.871</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Table S3, Fig. 2a, b). Treatments significantly (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M256" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.02</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) affected <inline-formula><mml:math id="M257" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, with more extractable NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M258" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the ConventMM (31.22 mg N kg<sup>−1</sup>, 20–42.40 CI) than in the Conventional (19.20 mg kg<sup>−1</sup>, 8–30.50 CI), in the first season (Table S4, Fig. 2c).</p>

      <fig id="F2" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 2</label><caption><p id="d2e3833">Box-whisker and half violin plot showing the effect of cropping systems on NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M261" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>  and NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M262" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> during the Long rain season and Short rain season in Gulu, Uganda. Upper and lower edges of boxes indicate 75th and 25th percentiles, horizontal lines within boxes indicate median, whiskers below and above the boxes indicate the 10th and 90th percentiles, and triangles indicate arithmetic mean. Differences between treatments were tested using the Tukey post-hoc test. Different letters represent significant differences (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M263" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>).</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/2787/2026/bg-23-2787-2026-f02.png"/>

        </fig>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS4">
  <label>3.4</label><title>Effect of rotations, tillage and biochar on cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M264" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions</title>
      <p id="d2e3900">Cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M265" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and area-weighted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M266" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions ranged from 0.24–0.50 and 0.25–0.39 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M267" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively, in the 1st season (long rain season); and from 0.19–0.61 and 0.20–0.58 kg N ha<sup>−1</sup>, respectively, in the 2nd season (short rain season). For the entire sampling period, May 2023–January 2024, cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M269" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and area-weighted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M270" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions ranged from 0.44–1.11 and 0.46–0.88 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M271" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, respectively. (Fig. 3). Cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M272" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions were significantly affected by treatments (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M273" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and growing season (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M274" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.01</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) (Table S7). In the 1st season, interrow emissions in the conventional treatment were <inline-formula><mml:math id="M275" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.27</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M276" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which was significantly higher than in all the other treatments. In the 2nd season, interrow emissions in the conventional treatment increased to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M277" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.61</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M278" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, which was significantly higher than in the CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M279" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC treatment (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M280" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.19</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> kg N ha<sup>−1</sup>). Cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M282" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from the basins/inrows were not affected by treatments. Under pigeon pea maize rotation, CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M283" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC significantly reduced (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M284" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) seasonal and area-weighted cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M285" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, combared to the Conventional for both individual seasons and for the whole sampling period combined (Seasons 1 and 2). Whole-period emissions averaged <inline-formula><mml:math id="M286" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.46</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.08</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M287" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> under CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M288" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC compared to <inline-formula><mml:math id="M289" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.88</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.14</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M290" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> under the conventional treatment. There were no significant differences in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M291" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions between CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M292" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC and CA alone. Under conventional tillage, weighted cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M293" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in the conventionally tilled pigeon pea–maize rotation (Conventional) did not differ (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M294" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) from the conventionally tilled maize monocrop (ConventMM) in either seasons (Figs. 3, S3, Table S8).</p>

      <fig id="F3" specific-use="star"><label>Figure 3</label><caption><p id="d2e4307">Position-specific (basin/inrow and interrow) and area-weighted cumulative N<sub>2</sub>O emissions (kg N ha<sup>−1</sup>) for different cropping systems during the <bold>(a)</bold> Long rain season (May 2023–September 2023), <bold>(b)</bold> Short rain season (October 2023–January 2024) and <bold>(c)</bold> sum of both seasons (May 2023–January 2024), in Gulu, Uganda. Error bars represent standard errors (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M297" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Different letters represent significant differences between treatments for each of the seasons or the cumulative of all the seasons (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M298" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) using the Tukey post-hoc test. Roman letters compare basins/in-rows while italicized and bold letters compare inter-rows and area-weighted N<sub>2</sub>O emissions, respectively.</p></caption>
          <graphic xlink:href="https://bg.copernicus.org/articles/23/2787/2026/bg-23-2787-2026-f03.png"/>

        </fig>

<table-wrap id="T3" specific-use="star"><label>Table 3</label><caption><p id="d2e4384">Grain yield, grain N yield, area-weighted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M300" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, yield scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M301" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and N yield scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M302" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions during the first and second rain season, in northern Uganda. When calculating yield and N scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M303" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, a weighing factor of 0.12 in planting basins and 0.88 in inter-rows was used in CA treatments (CA and CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M304" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC), and a weighing factor of 0.50 was used for both inrows and interrows in conventional treatments (ConventMM and Conventional). Shown are arithmetic means with standard errors (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M305" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>N</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>). Uppercase letters compare seasons specifically for a monocrop treatment (ConventMM), maize was grown in both seasons, for grain yield and grain N yield. Lowercase letters compare treatments within a season. Different letters represent significant differences (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M306" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), determined at 5 % level using Tukey test.</p></caption><oasis:table frame="topbot"><oasis:tgroup cols="8">
     <oasis:colspec colnum="1" colname="col1" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="2" colname="col2" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="3" colname="col3" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="4" colname="col4" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="5" colname="col5" align="left" colsep="1"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="6" colname="col6" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="7" colname="col7" align="left"/>
     <oasis:colspec colnum="8" colname="col8" align="left"/>
     <oasis:thead>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Season</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Treatment</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Crop</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col4">Grain yield</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col5">Grain N yield</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col6">Area-weighted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M307" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col7">Yield scaled emissions</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry rowsep="1" colname="col8">N yield scaled emissions</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry namest="col4" nameend="col5" align="center" colsep="1">(kg ha<sup>−1</sup>) </oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M309" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M310" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>)</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M311" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> N grain)</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:thead>
     <oasis:tbody>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Long rain season</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">ConventMM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">Maize</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M312" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">857</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">157</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> B</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M313" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> B</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M314" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.29</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ab A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M315" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.36</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M316" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">29.86</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.44</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Conventional</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">pigeon pea</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M317" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1267</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">84</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M318" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">40</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M319" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.39</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M320" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.32</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M321" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">9.93</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">CA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">pigeon pea</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M322" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1539</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">176</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M323" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">51</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M324" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.25</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M325" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.16</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M326" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.95</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.85</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M327" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">pigeon pea</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M328" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1580</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">90</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M329" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">51</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M330" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.26</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M331" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.17</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.03</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M332" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.31</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.97</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row rowsep="1">
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M333" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.127</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.099</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.021</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M334" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M335" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula></oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1">Short rain season</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">ConventMM</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">maize</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M336" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2591</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">157</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M337" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">30</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M338" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.40</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.13</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ab A</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M339" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.15</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.04</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a B</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M340" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">13.46</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3.87</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a B</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">Conventional</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">maize</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M341" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2658</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">123</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M342" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">35</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M343" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.58</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.12</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M344" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.19</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M345" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">14.83</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4.13</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">CA</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">maize</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M346" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2744</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">311</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M347" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">34</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M348" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.36</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.06</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ab</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M349" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.13</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.02</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M350" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">10.39</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.65</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2">CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M351" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3">maize</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M352" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2758</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">175</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M353" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">39</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M354" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.20</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.05</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> b</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M355" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.07</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.02</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M356" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">5.11</mml:mn><mml:mo>±</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.34</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> a</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
       <oasis:row>
         <oasis:entry colname="col1"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col2"><inline-formula><mml:math id="M357" display="inline"><mml:mi>P</mml:mi></mml:math></inline-formula> value</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col3"/>
         <oasis:entry colname="col4">0.914</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col5">0.228</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col6">0.043</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col7">0.106</oasis:entry>
         <oasis:entry colname="col8">0.092</oasis:entry>
       </oasis:row>
     </oasis:tbody>
   </oasis:tgroup></oasis:table></table-wrap>

</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S3.SS5">
  <label>3.5</label><title>Treatment effects on grain yield and yield scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M358" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions</title>
      <p id="d2e5424">Different treatments did not affect grain yield in the 1st (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M359" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.127</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and 2nd season. Pigeon pea grain yield ranged from 1.3–1.6 t ha<sup>−1</sup> in the first season, and maize grain yield ranged from 2.6–2.8 t ha<sup>−1</sup> in the second season. Grain N yield was also not affected by treatments and ranged from 10–51 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M362" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the first season, and from 30–39 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M363" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in the second season (Table 3). Yield scaled emissions and N yield scaled emissions ranged from 0.16–0.32 g <inline-formula><mml:math id="M364" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-N kg<sup>−1</sup> grain and 5.11–29.86 g <inline-formula><mml:math id="M366" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-N kg<sup>−1</sup> grain N, respectively; with significantly lower values for CA and CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M368" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC than for Conventional in the first season. Conventional also had significantly high area-weighted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M369" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M370" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.021</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>), yield scaled emissions (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M371" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) and N yield scaled emissions (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M372" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>) in the 1st season. For the first season, ConventMM was not compared to other treatments as it was the only treatment with maize whilst other treatments had pigeon pea. Maize yield in ConventMM were significantly higher in the second season compared to the first season, while yield scaled emissions were greater in the first season.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4">
  <label>4</label><title>Discussion</title>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS1">
  <label>4.1</label><title>Dynamics of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M373" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes</title>
      <p id="d2e5641">Treatment-averaged <inline-formula><mml:math id="M374" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes ranged from 1.0–51.2 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M375" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Fig. 1a), and the cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M376" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from May 2023–January 2024 were less than 1.2 kg <inline-formula><mml:math id="M377" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>-N ha<sup>−1</sup>. These emission rates are in the same order of magnitude as those found by research carried out in fertilized tropical soils under conservation agriculture with biochar in Kenya and Zambia (Fungo et al., 2017; Munera-Echeverri et al., 2022). Low fluxes of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M379" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M380" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">µ</mml:mi><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">m</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">h</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> were also reported in unfertilized systems (control treatments) in Kenya and Zimbabwe (Hickman et al., 2015; Mapanda et al., 2011). Low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M381" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions can be attributed to low soil mineral N contents (Fig. 1b, c) (Chapuis-Lardy et al., 2009). Increased <inline-formula><mml:math id="M382" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission rates were recorded in October 2023, after harvesting pigeon pea and immediate sowing for the second season (Fig. 1a). These emissions might have been associated with decomposition of pigeon pea residues, leaf litter and root turnover, which provided readily available C and N substrates that fuel <inline-formula><mml:math id="M383" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> production. In the conventional treatment, soil disturbance during land preparation for second season, combined with pigeon pea residues from the first season might have further stimulated microbial activities and accelerated <inline-formula><mml:math id="M384" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes. Additionally, consumption of labile C by heterotrophs may have created anaerobic microsites that promoted denitrification, especially since the period following harvest coincided with heavy rainfalls and high WFPS values (Fig. 2d). A similar, though smaller emission peak was observed in June when abundant rainfall terminated a dry spell. Rewetting of dry soil triggers <inline-formula><mml:math id="M385" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes likely due to increased nitrification and denitrification fueled by release of readily available N and C from dead microbial biomass (Namoi et al., 2019), and it is an important <inline-formula><mml:math id="M386" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> source in seasonally dry ecosystems (Hickman et al., 2011). Likewise, after harvest and sowing, plant N uptake is small, which might have supported elevated microbial C and N turnover. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M387" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> flux peaks were short-lived lasting for only 2 weeks (Fig. 1a).</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS2">
  <label>4.2</label><title>Mineral N and WFPS</title>
      <p id="d2e5862">Daily <inline-formula><mml:math id="M388" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes were weakly correlated to mineral N. The Gulu site has a relatively low soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M389" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="italic">δ</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">15</mml:mn></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>N value of 4.64 and a soil N content of 0.11 % (Namatsheve et al., 2025), indicating a highly efficient and tight N cycling (Craine et al., 2015). This suggests that microbes in these soils compete effectively for mineral N, likely immobilizing N and thereby reducing its availability for microbial N transformations such as nitrification and denitrification. We anticipated that biological N<sub>2</sub>-fixation by pigeon pea in the first season would result in higher <inline-formula><mml:math id="M391" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in the second season, especially in CA treatments where N<sub>2</sub>-fixation ranged 50–105 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M393" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Namatsheve et al., 2025). However, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M394" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and mineral N did not appear to be driven by N<sub>2</sub>-fixation. Our results imply that N<sub>2</sub>-fixation and residue retention do not directly affect soil mineral N or <inline-formula><mml:math id="M397" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in unfertilized soils with inherently low N. Rochette et al. (2004) also reported considerable uncertainty in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M398" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission from soils under legumes, they noted that soil mineral N alone was a poor predictor of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M399" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions for two seasons in acidic soils in Canada. Biological N<sub>2</sub>-fixation was removed as a direct source of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M401" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> because of the lack of evidence of significant emissions arising from the N fixation (IPCC, 2019).</p>
      <p id="d2e6034">Generally, NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M402" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> and NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M403" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> contents were more variable in the 1st season (May–October) than the 2nd season (October–January) Figs. 1b, c, 2). At the onset of the experiment, mineral N was most likely from mineralisation of mulched grasses having grown under fallow for 3 years prior to the experiment. Although residual glyphosate applied during land preparation may have influenced soil N dynamics in the first season (Kanissery et al., 2019), the relatively high temperatures at the site (mean 25 °C, range 23–34 °C) likely promoted rapid degradation, reducing the likelihood of persistent effects during the crop growth period. In the 1st season, ConventMM was planted with maize whereas other treatments were planted with pigeon pea, which may have contributed to differences in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M404" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations. Under conventional tillage, higher NH<inline-formula><mml:math id="M405" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> in maize (ConventMM) than pigeon pea (Conventional) in the first season might be attributed to differences in crop phenology. Pigeon pea is a slow starter; its nodulation and peak biological N<sub>2</sub>-fixation typically occur around 80 d after sowing (Kumar Rao and Dart, 1987). Legumes generally show a stronger affinity for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M407" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> due to lower energy cost for its assimilation, thus reducing soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M408" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> levels compared to maize, which generally exhibits slower early-season N uptake and preference towards <inline-formula><mml:math id="M409" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Daryanto et al., 2019). However, during the first season, CA and CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M410" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC had also signficant <inline-formula><mml:math id="M411" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> concentrations although they were planted with pigeon pea. Reduced tillage, residue retention and biochar may have enhanced early-season mineralization, while simultaneously slowing nitrification, allowing <inline-formula><mml:math id="M412" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to accumulate. The concentration of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M413" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> was low and not affected by treatments in any of the two seasons. Our result for mineral N aligns with findings of Mapanda et al. (2011) who also reported low mineral N in an unfertilized treatment on clay and sandy soils.</p>
      <p id="d2e6182">High <inline-formula><mml:math id="M414" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission rates go often along with high WFPS values, increasing the anaerobic volume and hence denitrification in soils (Hao et al., 2025; Wang et al., 2023). We found a weak positive relationship between WFPS and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M415" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (<inline-formula><mml:math id="M416" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msup><mml:mi>R</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msup><mml:mo>=</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.02</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M417" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.001</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>; Fig. S3). This relationship is only expected to be linear over a limited part of the range of potential WFPS values. High evaporation under tropical conditions due to high temperatures (mean 25 °C, range 23–34 °C) result in rapid water loss, which drastically reduced the time the soil was above 60 % WFPS, despite high rainfalls throughout the sampling period (Fig. 1d, e). Apart from June–July 2023, WFPS was <inline-formula><mml:math id="M418" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">60</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> %, which is often considered a threshold for denitrification-driven <inline-formula><mml:math id="M419" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. This may, in part, explain the weak correlation between WFPS and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M420" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes in our study.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS3">
  <label>4.3</label><title>Crop rotation, tillage and biochar on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M421" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions</title>
      <p id="d2e6297">Area-weighted cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M422" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions ranged from 0.2 to 0.6 kg ha<sup>−1</sup> in the 1st and 2nd season, respectively. These results are consistent with Millar et al. (2004) who also converted a natural fallow to an improved system and reported low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M424" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in an unfertilized control treatment. Similarly, Baggs et al. (2006), Bwana et al. (2021) and Hickman et al. (2015) reported low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M425" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions of 0.1–0.5 kg ha<sup>−1</sup> in unfertilized conventional treatments; these comparisons indicate that <inline-formula><mml:math id="M427" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from unfertilized soils remain relatively low. In fertilized systems in SSA, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M428" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions also remain relatively low. For instance, Mapanda et al. (2011) reported emissions of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M429" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.29</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> kg <inline-formula><mml:math id="M430" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ha<sup>−1</sup> following application of 120 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M432" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> of fertilizer. The authors speculated that low emissions at high N fertilizer rates were due to the experimental design which was not particularly good at fully identifying hotspots of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M433" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> associated with the spot application of fertilizer used, and sporadic measurements.</p>
      <p id="d2e6459">Weighted cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M434" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in the conventionally tilled pigeon pea–maize rotation (Conventional) did not differ from the conventionally tilled maize monocrop (ConventMM) (Figs. 3, S3). The trials were established in a soil with low organic N content without inorganic N fertilization. However, after some seasons, inputs from crop residues and biological N<sub>2</sub>-fixation may enhance soil fertility. Effect of crop rotations appear to be relevant for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M436" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions only when inorganic fertilizers are applied in long term trials. Jeuffroy et al. (2013) reported a 75 %–80 % reduction in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M437" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in a 4-year study under pea rotation without N input compared to a fertilized monocrop, illustrating the significance of N input for <inline-formula><mml:math id="M438" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, rather than the effect of rotation itself.</p>
      <p id="d2e6523">In pigeon pea–maize rotations, area-weighted cumulative <inline-formula><mml:math id="M439" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions under CA (area weighting factors of 0.12 and 0.88 for basins (disturbed) and interrow (undisturbed) areas, respectively) were significantly lower than those under the conventional rotation (area weighting factors of 0.5 and 0.5 for inrow (disturbed) and interrow (undisturbed) areas, respectively) in the first season. This difference may be attributed to full soil inversion in the conventional system, as soil disturbance promotes rapid drying and rewetting cycles, thereby increasing area-weighted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M440" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions compared to reduced tillage. However, in the second season, and for the whole sampling period, CA alone did not affect weighted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M441" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. These findings are partly consistent with Jantalia et al. (2008) and Ruan and Robertson (2013) who reported higher <inline-formula><mml:math id="M442" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions under conventional tillage compared with reduced tillage, which they attributed to soil disturbance, increased soil aeration and accelerated organic matter breakdown. Lack of consistent differences across seasons in our study suggests that the effect of tillage under rotations on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M443" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions may be context-dependent, particularly under varying environmental conditions. In the Conventional treatment, interrow and area-weighted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M444" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions exhibited persistently high levels of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M445" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> across all seasons. We have shown that conventional treatment had the least root biomass compared to other treatments, and that roots were concentrated in the in-rows (Namatsheve et al., 2025). The inter-rows typically have lower root density which limits N uptake and leaves more mineral N for microbial processes thus creating localised hotspots that fuelled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M446" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. We speculate that low root density in the inter-rows might reduce rhizospheric activity and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M447" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> diffusion, which can favor denitrification.</p>
      <p id="d2e6643">Although there are no significant differences in weighted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M448" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions between reduced tillage treatments (CA and CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M449" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC) in pigeon pea–maize rotations, biochar applied at a rate of 5 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M450" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">Mg</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> to CA systems (CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M451" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC) reduced area-weighted <inline-formula><mml:math id="M452" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions by 33 % and 66 % compared to Conventional treatment in the 1st and 2nd season, respectively (Fig. 3). Biochar with a high <inline-formula><mml:math id="M453" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">C</mml:mi><mml:mo>:</mml:mo><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratio of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M454" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&gt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">60</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>, as applied in this study, was shown to reduce the bioavailability of inorganic N through microbial immobilisation (Namoi et al., 2019) or sorption of NO<inline-formula><mml:math id="M455" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:msubsup><mml:mi/><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> due to unconventional H-bonding between <inline-formula><mml:math id="M456" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ions and biochar surface functional groups (Kammann et al., 2017; Nguyen et al., 2017). In a fertilized Ultisol in western Kenya, Fungo et al. (2019) reported a 22 % reduction in emissions. Case et al. (2015) also reported that biochar suppressed <inline-formula><mml:math id="M457" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in a sandy loam soil fertilized with 140 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M458" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">yr</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. Biochar applied in a calcareous soil also reduced <inline-formula><mml:math id="M459" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions by 50 %, and increased soil <inline-formula><mml:math id="M460" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NH</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">4</mml:mn><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:msubsup><mml:mo>/</mml:mo><mml:msubsup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">NO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">3</mml:mn><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:msubsup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> ratio, indicating that biochar impaired nitrification and N immobilisation processes (Lentz et al., 2014). Our results support the growing evidence that biochar can mitigate <inline-formula><mml:math id="M461" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions via various N cycling modifications (Liu et al., 2018; Zhang et al., 2021; Kammann et al., 2017). However, biochar did not significantly reduce <inline-formula><mml:math id="M462" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> scaled emissions compared to conventMM, suggesting that these modifying effects were insufficient to offset the partly legume induced increase in <inline-formula><mml:math id="M463" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions (Fig. 3). In a short-term study, Munera-Echeverri et al. (2022) also reported that biochar amendments did not affect <inline-formula><mml:math id="M464" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in Zambia despite increased gross nitrification rates in the biochar treatments. In a global meta-analysis, Shakoor et al. (2021) showed that biochar increased <inline-formula><mml:math id="M465" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions by 20 %. Discrepancies on response of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M466" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions to biochar might be explained by biochar type, soil parameters, climatic conditions and experimental duration.</p>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S4.SS4">
  <label>4.4</label><title>Yield and yield scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M467" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions</title>
      <p id="d2e6930">In pigeon pea–maize treatments had no significant effect on grain and grain N yields in either season. Rusinamhodzi et al. (2011) highlighted that high inputs of especially N fertilizer are required to realize yield benefits of CA. When inorganic fertilizer is applied, positive effects of CA become more prominent in the long term. In Zambia, benefits of biochar and/or CA on grain yield were reported after several seasons (Martinsen et al., 2014, 2017; Munera-Echeverri et al., 2020). Yields in the first season under conventional tillage with maize monocropping (ConventMM) were low, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M468" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1.6</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M469" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">t</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> the average maize yield in Uganda without N fertilization (Kaizzi et al., 2012). Low rainfall received from early May to mid-June, during the critical growth stage for maize (tasselling and grain filling) drastically reduced maize grain yield in the first season.</p>
      <p id="d2e6960">Reducing yield-scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M470" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission has been pointed out as one of the most promising strategies to increase crop yield while reducing <inline-formula><mml:math id="M471" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions. Assessing yield and N yield-scaled emissions is therefore important, as sustainable cropping systems must maintain or increase grain and protein yield while reducing greenhouse gas emissions per unit of agricultural output to reconcile food security with climate change mitigation (Yao et al., 2024). In this study, yield-scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M472" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission were 0.16–0.32 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M473" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> grain in the first season, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M474" display="inline"><mml:mrow><mml:mo>&lt;</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">0.20</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M475" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">g</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> grain in the second season. During the first season, yield-scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M476" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emission in CA and CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M477" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC were significantly reduced by 50 % compared to conventional practices, indicating that N use efficiency was high. These practices were effective in minimising emissions without penalising pigeon pea yields. This supports CA and CA <inline-formula><mml:math id="M478" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> BC as sustainable agricultural practices.</p>
      <p id="d2e7080">A key challenge for the sustainability of unfertilized agroecosystems is the management of soil nutrient balances. While biochar amendments in CA systems can effectively reduce <inline-formula><mml:math id="M479" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and maintain crop productivity (Borchard et al., 2019), these systems gradually deplete soil nutrient reserves when mineral fertilizers are not applied (Falconnier et al., 2023). Although <inline-formula><mml:math id="M480" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> is a powerful GHG, it represents a relatively small component of the total annual N budget, often less than 1 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M481" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace width="0.125em" linebreak="nobreak"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>. The primary source of nutrient removal is the export of grain, which removes a significant amount of N from the system. While biological N2-fixation from pigeon pea can fix up to 110 <inline-formula><mml:math id="M482" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="unit"><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">kg</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mspace linebreak="nobreak" width="0.125em"/><mml:msup><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">ha</mml:mi><mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">1</mml:mn></mml:mrow></mml:msup></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> (Namatsheve et al., 2025), some of this input can as well be exported from the field in the exported grain and stalks, and the remaining N in the form of decaying roots, rhizodeposits and leaf fall is often insufficient to fully compensate for the N removed (Adu-Gyamfi et al., 2007). Furthermore, the biologically fixed N is prone to rapid mineralization and subsequent loss through leaching or other pathways before the next crop can fully utilize it. To achieve long term sustainability, an integrated approach is required, including targeted fertilization to prevent continuous nutrient mining and to ensure the long-term viability of the agroecosystem.</p>
</sec>
</sec>
<sec id="Ch1.S5" sec-type="conclusions">
  <label>5</label><title>Conclusions</title>
      <p id="d2e7159">This study provides insight into <inline-formula><mml:math id="M483" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from unfertilized low-input agroecosystems that dominate much of sub-Saharan Africa. We have shown that biochar amendments under reduced tillage mitigate <inline-formula><mml:math id="M484" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> scaled emissions compared to conventional pigeon pea–maize rotations but not compared to conventional maize monocropping or CA alone. Pigeon pea rotation under conventional tillage did not affect the emissions compared to conventional maize monocropping, suggesting that incorporating legumes in rotations do not increase <inline-formula><mml:math id="M485" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in unfertilized systems. <inline-formula><mml:math id="M486" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes peaks occurred following rainfall events after dry spells and the incorporation of high-quality pigeon pea residues, these peaks were short lived, indicating that crop residue-driven pulses are temporary in these unfertilized systems. Yield scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M487" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions were substantially lower under conservation agriculture, and conservation agriculture with biochar, implying that <inline-formula><mml:math id="M488" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions can be reduced without penalising pigeon pea grain yield. While our study was carried out in two consecutive growing seasons within the first year of establishing the experiment, limiting our ability to generalise the findings across years; our observations on low <inline-formula><mml:math id="M489" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions, crop residue driven peaks on <inline-formula><mml:math id="M490" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> fluxes, and the mitigating effect of biochar are consistent with the limited number of studies available from SSA. These patterns highlight the potential of biochar amendments in CA systems to reduced <inline-formula><mml:math id="M491" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions in subsistence farming systems. Long term studies on response of soils to CA and biochar amendments in both fertilized and unfertilized systems are needed to improve understanding of GHG emissions.</p>
</sec>

      
      </body>
    <back><notes notes-type="codedataavailability"><title>Code and data availability</title>

      <p id="d2e7284">The code will be available from the corresponding author and data is available at NMBU dataverse repository <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18710/CNP8TF" ext-link-type="DOI">10.18710/CNP8TF</ext-link> (Namatsheve et al., 2026).</p>
  </notes><app-group>
        <supplementary-material position="anchor"><p id="d2e7290">The supplement related to this article is available online at <inline-supplementary-material xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-23-2787-2026-supplement" xlink:title="pdf">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-23-2787-2026-supplement</inline-supplementary-material>.</p></supplementary-material>
        </app-group><notes notes-type="authorcontribution"><title>Author contributions</title>

      <p id="d2e7299">TN: Experimental design, Data collection, Lab analysis, Data curation, Writing – original draft and editing, Visualization, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Conceptualization. VM: Experimental design, writing – review &amp; editing, Formal analysis, Supervision, Resources, Project administration, Funding acquisition, Conceptualization. JM: Experimental design, Writing – review &amp; editing, Supervision, Conceptualization. AO: Experimental design, Supervision, Conceptualization. PD: Lab analysis, Data curation, Writing – review &amp; editing, Supervision, Conceptualization.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="competinginterests"><title>Competing interests</title>

      <p id="d2e7305">The contact author has declared that none of the authors has any competing interests.</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="disclaimer"><title>Disclaimer</title>

      <p id="d2e7311">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. The authors bear the ultimate responsibility for providing appropriate place names. Views expressed in the text are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher.</p>
  </notes><ack><title>Acknowledgements</title><p id="d2e7317">This study was funded by Norwegian University of Life Sciences PhD grant to the first author through the CLIMSMART project funded by Norwegian Research Council (NRC no. 302713); aiming at increasing food security, on-farm profitability, and entrepreneurship of smallholder farms in Uganda through training and implementation of climate smart practices. Additional support was obtained from the Climate Smart Agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa project (NORHED II NMBU, 2021-2026, QZA-21/0182) under the Norwegian Programme for Capacity Development in Higher Education and Research for Development (NORHED II), funded by the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD).</p></ack><notes notes-type="financialsupport"><title>Financial support</title>

      <p id="d2e7322">This study was funded by Norwegian University of Life Sciences PhD grant to the first author through the CLIMSMART project funded by Norwegian Research Council (NRC no. 302713); aiming at increasing food security, on-farm profitability, and entrepreneurship of smallholder farms in Uganda through training and implementation of climate smart practices. Additional support was obtained from the Climate Smart Agriculture in Sub-Saharan Africa project (NORHED II NMBU, 2021-2026, QZA-21/0182) under the Norwegian Programme for Capacity Development in Higher Education and Research for Development (NORHED II), funded by the Norwegian Agency for Development Cooperation (NORAD).</p>
  </notes><notes notes-type="reviewstatement"><title>Review statement</title>

      <p id="d2e7328">This paper was edited by Andreas Ibrom and reviewed by Kathrin Fuchs and one anonymous referee.</p>
  </notes><ref-list>
    <title>References</title>

      <ref id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>Abalos, D., Recous, S., Butterbach-Bahl, K., De Notaris, C., Rittl, T. F., Topp, C. F. E., Petersen, S. O., Hansen, S., Bleken, M. A., Rees, R. M., and Olesen, J. E.: A review and meta-analysis of mitigation measures for nitrous oxide emissions from crop residues, Sci. Total Environ., 828, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154388" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154388</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>Adegbeye, M. J., Ravi Kanth Reddy, P., Obaisi, A. I., Elghandour, M. M. M. Y., Oyebamiji, K. J., Salem, A. Z. M., Morakinyo-Fasipe, O. T., Cipriano-Salazar, M., and Camacho-Díaz, L. M.: Sustainable agriculture options for production, greenhouse gasses and pollution alleviation, and nutrient recycling in emerging and transitional nations – An overview, J. Clean. Prod., 242, 118319, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118319" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118319</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>Adu-Gyamfi, J. J., Myaka, F. A., Sakala, W. D., Odgaard, R., Vesterager, J. M., and Høgh-Jensen, H.: Biological nitrogen fixation and nitrogen and phosphorus budgets in farmer-managed intercrops of maize-pigeonpea in semi-arid southern and eastern Africa, Plant Soil, 295, 127–136, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-007-9270-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11104-007-9270-0</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation> Africa Union: Africa fertilizer and soil health summit, Nairobi, 1–53 pp., 2024.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation> Aho, K., Derryberry, D., and Peterson, T.: Model selection for ecologists: the worldviews of AIC and BIC, Ecology, 95, 631–636, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>Baggs, E. M., Chebii, J., and Ndufa, J. K.: A short-term investigation of trace gas emissions following tillage and no-tillage of agroforestry residues in western Kenya, Soil Till. Res., 90, 69–76, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2005.08.006" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.still.2005.08.006</ext-link>, 2006.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>Bates, D. M.: lme4: Mixed-effects modeling with R, <uri>http://lme4.r-forge.r-project.org/book/</uri> (last access: 17 April 2025), 2010.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>Boateng, K. K., Obeng, G. Y., and Mensah, E.: Agricultural Greenhouse Gases from Sub-Saharan Africa, in: Energy, Environment, and Sustainability, Springer Nature, 73–85, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3272-2_6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/978-981-13-3272-2_6</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>Borchard, N., Schirrmann, M., Cayuela, M. L., Kammann, C., Wrage-Mönnig, N., Estavillo, J. M., Fuertes-Mendizábal, T., Sigua, G., Spokas, K., Ippolito, J. A., and Novak, J.: Biochar, soil and land-use interactions that reduce nitrate leaching and N<sub>2</sub>O emissions: a meta-analysis, Sci. Total Environ., 651, 2354–2364, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.060" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.060</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>Bwana, T. N., Amuri, N. A., Semu, E., Elsgaard, L., Butterbach-Bahl, K., Pelster, D. E., and Olesen, J. E.: Soil N<sub>2</sub>O emission from organic and conventional cotton farming in Northern Tanzania, Sci. Total Environ., 785, 1–10, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147301" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147301</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>Case, S. D. C., McNamara, N. P., Reay, D. S., Stott, A. W., Grant, H. K., and Whitaker, J.: Biochar suppresses <inline-formula><mml:math id="M494" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions while maintaining N availability in a sandy loam soil, Soil Biol. Biochem., 81, 178–185, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2014.11.012" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.soilbio.2014.11.012</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>Chapuis-Lardy, L., Metay, A., Martinet, M., Rabenarivo, M., Toucet, J., Douzet, J. M., Razafimbelo, T., Rabeharisoa, L., and Rakotoarisoa, J.: Nitrous oxide fluxes from Malagasy agricultural soils, Geoderma, 148, 421–427, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2008.11.015" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.geoderma.2008.11.015</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>Cornelissen, G., Pandit, N. R., Taylor, P., Pandit, B. H., Sparrevik, M., and Schmidt, H. P.: Emissions and char quality of flame-curtain “Kon Tiki” kilns for farmer-scale charcoal/biochar production, PLoS One, 11, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154617" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1371/journal.pone.0154617</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>Craine, J. M., Brookshire, E. N. J., Cramer, M. D., Hasselquist, N. J., Koba, K., Marin-Spiotta, E., and Wang, L.: Ecological interpretations of nitrogen isotope ratios of terrestrial plants and soils, Plant Soil, 396, 1–26, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-015-2542-1" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11104-015-2542-1</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>Daryanto, S., Wang, L., Gilhooly, W. P., and Jacinthe, P.: Nitrogen preference across generations under changing ammonium nitrate ratios, J. Plant Ecol., 12, 235–244, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1093/jpe/rty014" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1093/jpe/rty014</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>Dick, J., Kaya, B., Soutoura, M., Skiba, U., Smith, R., Niang, A., and Tabo, R.: The contribution of agricultural practices to nitrous oxide emissions in semi-arid Mali, Soil Use Manag., 24, 292–301, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-2743.2008.00163.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1475-2743.2008.00163.x</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>Falconnier, G.N., Cardinael, R., Corbeels, M., Baudron, F., Chivenge, P., Couëdel, A., Ripoche, A., Affholder, F., Naudin, K., Benaillon, E., Rusinamhodzi, L., Leroux, L., Vanlauwe, B., and Giller, K. E.: The input reduction principle of agroecology is wrong when it comes to mineral fertilizer use in sub-Saharan Africa, Outlook Agric.,  52, 311–326, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1177/00307270231199795" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1177/00307270231199795</ext-link>, 2023.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>Fang, H., Mo, J., Peng, S., Li, Z., and Wang, H.: Cumulative effects of nitrogen additions on litter decomposition in three tropical forests in southern China, Plant Soil, 297, 233–242, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-007-9339-9" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11104-007-9339-9</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>Fungo, B., Lehmann, J., Kalbitz, K., Tenywa, M., Thionìo, M., and Neufeldt, H.: Emissions intensity and carbon stocks of a tropical Ultisol after amendment with Tithonia green manure, urea and biochar, Field Crops Res., 209, 179–188, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.05.013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.fcr.2017.05.013</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>Fungo, B., Lehmann, J., Kalbitz, K., Thionìo, M., Tenywa, M., Okeyo, I., and Neufeldt, H.: Ammonia and nitrous oxide emissions from a field Ultisol amended with tithonia green manure, urea, and biochar, Biol. Fertil. Soils, 55, 135–148, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-018-01338-3" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s00374-018-01338-3</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation> Gee, G. W. and Bauder, J. W.: Particle size analysis, in: Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1, edited by: Klute, A., Am. Soc. Agron., Madison, WI, 383–411 pp., 1986.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>Giller, K. E., Andersson, J. A., Corbeels, M., Kirkegaard, J., Mortensen, D., Erenstein, O., and Vanlauwe, B.: Beyond conservation agriculture, Front. Plant Sci., 6, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00870" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3389/fpls.2015.00870</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>Glaser, B., Haumaier, L., Guggenberger, G., and Zech, W.: The `Terra Preta' phenomenon: a model for sustainable agriculture in the humid tropics, Naturwissenschaften, 88, 37–41, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s001140000193" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s001140000193</ext-link>, 2001.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>Guenet, B., Gabrielle, B., Chenu, C., Arrouays, D., Balesdent, J., Bernoux, M., Bruni, E., Caliman, J. P., Cardinael, R., Chen, S., Ciais, P., Desbois, D., Fouche, J., Frank, S., Henault, C., Lugato, E., Naipal, V., Nesme, T., Obersteiner, M., Pellerin, S., Powlson, D. S., Rasse, D. P., Rees, F., Soussana, J. F., Su, Y., Tian, H., Valin, H., and Zhou, F.: Can <inline-formula><mml:math id="M495" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions offset the benefits from soil organic carbon storage?, Glob. Change Biol., 27, 237–256, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15342" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/gcb.15342</ext-link>,  2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>Hao, Y., Mao, J., Bachmann, C. M., Hoffman, F. M., Koren, G., Chen, H., Tian, H., Liu, J., Tao, J., Tang, J., Li, L., Liu, L., Apple, M., Shi, M., Jin, M., Zhu, Q., Kannenberg, S., Shi, X., Zhang, X., Wang, Y., Fang, Y., and Dai, Y.: Soil moisture controls over carbon sequestration and greenhouse gas emissions: a review, npj Climate and Atmospheric Science. 8,  16, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-024-00888-8" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41612-024-00888-8</ext-link>,  2025.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>Hickman, J. E., Havlikova, M., Kroeze, C., and Palm, C. A.: Current and future nitrous oxide emissions from African agriculture, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 3,  370–378, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2011.08.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.cosust.2011.08.001</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>Hickman, J. E., Tully, K. L., Groffman, P. M., Diru, W., and Palm, C. A.: A potential tipping point in tropical agriculture: Avoiding rapid increases in nitrous oxide fluxes from agricultural intensification in Kenya, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 120, 938–951, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JG002913" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/2015JG002913</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>Hobbs, P. R., Sayre, K., and Gupta, R.: The role of conservation agriculture in sustainable agriculture, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B., 363, 543–555, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2169" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1098/rstb.2007.2169</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>Hothorn, T., Bretz, F., and Westfall, P.: Simultaneous inference in general parametric models, Biometrical J., 50, 346–363, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/bimj.200810425" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/bimj.200810425</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>IPCC: <inline-formula><mml:math id="M496" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from managed soils, and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M497" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">CO</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from lime and urea application, in: 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, edited by: Buendia, E. C., Tanabe, K., Kranjc, A., Jamsranjav, B., Fukuda, M., Ngarize, S., Osako, A., Pyrozhenko, Y., Shermanau, P., and Federici, S., IPCC, Switzerland, ISBN 978-4-88788-232-4, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>Jantalia, C. P., Dos Santos, H. P., Urquiaga, S., Boddey, R. M., and Alves, B. J. R.: Fluxes of nitrous oxide from soil under different crop rotations and tillage systems in the South of Brazil, Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst., 82, 161–173, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-008-9178-y" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s10705-008-9178-y</ext-link>, 2008.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>Jeffery, S., Bezemer, T. M., Cornelissen, G., Kuyper, T. W., Lehmann, J., Mommer, L., Sohi, S. P., van de Voorde, T. F. J., Wardle, D. A., and van Groenigen, J. W.: The way forward in biochar research: Targeting trade-offs between the potential wins, GCB Bioenergy, 7, 1–13, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12132" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/gcbb.12132</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>Jensen, E. S., Peoples, M. B., Boddey, R. M., Gresshoff, P. M., Henrik, H. N., Alves, B. J. R., and Morrison, M. J.: Legumes for mitigation of climate change and the provision of feedstock for biofuels and biorefineries. A review, Agron. Sustain. Dev., 32, 329–364, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-011-0056-7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s13593-011-0056-7</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>Jeuffroy, M. H., Baranger, E., Carrouée, B., de Chezelles, E., Gosme, M., Hénault, C., Schneider, A., and Cellier, P.: Nitrous oxide emissions from crop rotations including wheat, oilseed rape and dry peas, Biogeosciences, 10, 1787–1797, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-1787-2013" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-10-1787-2013</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>Kaizzi, K. C., Byalebeka, J., Semalulu, O., Alou, I., Zimwanguyizza, W., Nansamba, A., Musinguzi, P., Ebanyat, P., Hyuha, T., and Wortmann, C. S.: Maize response to fertilizer and nitrogen use efficiency in Uganda, Agron. J., 104, 73–82, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2011.0181" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2134/agronj2011.0181</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>Kammann, C., Ippolito, J., Hagemann, N., Borchard, N., Cayuela, M. L., Estavillo, J. M., Fuertes-Mendizabal, T., Jeffery, S., Kern, J., Novak, J., Rasse, D., Saarnio, S., Schmidt, H. P., Spokas, K., and Wrage-Mönnig, N.: Biochar as a tool to reduce the agricultural greenhouse-gas burden–knowns, unknowns and future research needs, J. Environ. Eng. Landsc., 25, 114–139, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3846/16486897.2017.1319375" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3846/16486897.2017.1319375</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>Kanissery, R., Gairhe, B., Kadyampakeni, D., Batuman, O., and Alferez, F.: Glyphosate: Its environmental persistence and impact on crop health and nutrition, Plants, 8, 1–11, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3390/plants8110499" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3390/plants8110499</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>Kim, D.-G., Thomas, A. D., Pelster, D., Rosenstock, T. S., and Sanz-Cobena, A.: Greenhouse gas emissions from natural ecosystems and agricultural lands in sub-Saharan Africa: synthesis of available data and suggestions for further research, Biogeosciences, 13, 4789–4809, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-4789-2016" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-13-4789-2016</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>Kumar Rao, J. V. D. K. and Dart, P. J.: Nodulation, nitrogen fixation and nitrogen uptake in pigeonpea (<italic>Cajanus cajan</italic> (L.) Millsp) of different maturity groups, Plant Soil, 99, 255–266, 1987.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>Lehmann, J.: A handful of carbon, Nature, 143–144, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/447143a" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/447143a</ext-link>, 2007.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>Lenth, R. V.: Least-Squares Means: The R Package lsmeans, J. Stat. Softw., 69, 1–33, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v069.i01" ext-link-type="DOI">10.18637/jss.v069.i01</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>Lentz, R. D., Ippolito, J. A., and Spokas, K. A.: Biochar and Manure Effects on Net Nitrogen Mineralization and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Calcareous Soil under Corn, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 78, 1641–1655, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2014.05.0198" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2136/sssaj2014.05.0198</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>Liu, Q., Zhang, Y., Liu, B., Amonette, J. E., Lin, Z., Liu, G., Ambus, P., and Xie, Z.: How does biochar influence soil N cycle? A meta-analysis, Plant Soil, 426, 211–225, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-018-3619-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11104-018-3619-4</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>Mapanda, F., Wuta, M., Nyamangara, J., and Rees, R. M.: Effects of organic and mineral fertilizer nitrogen on greenhouse gas emissions and plant-captured carbon during maize cropping in Zimbabwe, Plant Soil, 343, 67–81, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-011-0753-7" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11104-011-0753-7</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>Martinsen, V., Mulder, J., Shitumbanuma, V., Sparrevik, M., Børresen, T., and Cornelissen, G.: Farmer-led maize biochar trials: Effect on crop yield and soil nutrients under conservation farming, J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci., 177, 681–695, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.201300590" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1002/jpln.201300590</ext-link>, 2014.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>Martinsen, V., Shitumbanuma, V., Mulder, J., Ritz, C., and Cornelissen, G.: Effects of hand-hoe tilled conservation farming on soil quality and carbon stocks under on-farm conditions in Zambia, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 241, 168–178, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.03.010" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.agee.2017.03.010</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>Meier, E. A., Thorburn, P. J., Bell, L. W., Harrison, M. T., and Biggs, J. S.: Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Cropping and Grazed Pastures Are Similar: A Simulation Analysis in Australia, Front. Sustain. Food Syst., 3, 1–18, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2019.00121" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3389/fsufs.2019.00121</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>Millar, N., Ndufa, J. K., Cadisch, G., and Baggs, E. M.: Nitrous oxide emissions following incorporation of improved fallow residues in the humid tropics, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 18, 1–9, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GB002114" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1029/2003GB002114</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>Mubiru, D. N., Komutunga, E., Agona, A., Apok, A., Ngara, T., and Mubiru, D.: Characterising agrometeorological climate risks and uncertainties: Crop production in Uganda, S. Afr. J. Sci., 108, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.4102/sajs" ext-link-type="DOI">10.4102/sajs</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>Munera-Echeverri, J. L., Martinsen, V., Strand, L. T., Cornelissen, G., and Mulder, J.: Effect of conservation farming and biochar addition on soil organic carbon quality, nitrogen mineralization, and crop productivity in a light textured Acrisol in the sub-humid tropics, PLoS One, 15, 1–17, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228717" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1371/journal.pone.0228717</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>Munera-Echeverri, J. L., Martinsen, V., Dörsch, P., Obia, A., and Mulder, J.: Pigeon pea biochar addition in tropical Arenosol under maize increases gross nitrification rate without an effect on nitrous oxide emission, Plant Soil, 474, 195–212, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-022-05325-4" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s11104-022-05325-4</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>Namatsheve, T.: Biological N<sub>2</sub>-fixation, grain yield and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M499" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions: the role of conservation agriculture and biochar in unfertilized tropical soils, PhD thesis, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, 2025.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>Namatsheve, T., Chikowo, R., Corbeels, M., Mouquet-Rivier, C., Icard-Vernière, C., Cardinael, R., Icard-Verniere, C., and Cardinael, R.: Maize-cowpea intercropping as an ecological intensification option for low input systems in sub-humid Zimbabwe: Productivity, biological N2-fixation and grain mineral content, Field Crops Res., 263, 1–21, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2020.108052" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.fcr.2020.108052</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>Namatsheve, T., Martinsen, V., Obia, A., and Mulder, J.: Grain yield and nitrogen cycling under conservation agriculture and biochar amendment in agroecosystems of sub-Saharan Africa. A meta-analysis, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 376, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2024.109243" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.agee.2024.109243</ext-link>, 2024.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>Namatsheve, T., Mulder, J., Obia, A., and Martinsen, V.: Biological N<sub>2</sub>-fixation and grain yield of pigeon pea: The role of biochar and conservation agriculture in low-input systems, Field Crops Res., 328, 109923, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2025.109923" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.fcr.2025.109923</ext-link>, 2025.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>Namatsheve, T., Martinsen, V., Mulder, J, Obia, A., and Dörsch, P.: Data for: Nitrous oxide emissions from pigeon pea–maize rotation in response to conservation agriculture and biochar amendments in a Ferralsol, northern Uganda, NMBU dataverse [data set], <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.18710/CNP8TF" ext-link-type="DOI">10.18710/CNP8TF</ext-link>, 2026.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>Namoi, N., Pelster, D., Rosenstock, T. S., Mwangi, L., Kamau, S., Mutuo, P., and Barrios, E.: Earthworms regulate ability of biochar to mitigate CO<sub>2</sub> and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M502" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions from a tropical soil, Appl. Soil Ecol., 140, 57–67, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2019.04.001" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.apsoil.2019.04.001</ext-link>, 2019.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>Nguyen, T. T. N., Xu, C. Y., Tahmasbian, I., Che, R., Xu, Z., Zhou, X., Wallace, H. M., and Bai, S. H.: Effects of biochar on soil available inorganic nitrogen: A review and meta-analysis, Geoderma, 288,  79–96, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.11.004" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.11.004</ext-link>,  2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>Oriangi, G., Mukwaya, P. I., Luwa, J. K., Menya, E., Malinga, G. M., and Bamutaze, Y.: Variability and Changes in Climate in Northern Uganda, African Journal of Climate Change and Resource Sustainability, 3, 81–97, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.37284/ajccrs.3.1.1830" ext-link-type="DOI">10.37284/ajccrs.3.1.1830</ext-link>, 2024.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>Pittelkow, C. M., Liang, X., Linquist, B. A., Van Groenigen, L. J., Lee, J., Lundy, M. E., Van Gestel, N., Six, J., Venterea, R. T., and Van Kessel, C.: Productivity limits and potentials of the principles of conservation agriculture, Nature, 517, 365–368, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13809" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/nature13809</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>Portmann, R. W., Daniel, J. S., and Ravishankara, A. R.: Stratospheric ozone depletion due to nitrous oxide: Influences of other gases, Philos. T. R. Soc. B, 367, 1256–1264, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0377" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1098/rstb.2011.0377</ext-link>, 2012.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>Powlson, D. S., Whitmore, A. P., and Goulding, K. W. T.: Soil carbon sequestration to mitigate climate change: A critical re-examination to identify the true and the false, Eur. J. Soil Sci., 62, 42–55, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2010.01342.x" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/j.1365-2389.2010.01342.x</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>Raji, S. G. and Dörsch, P.: Effect of legume intercropping on N<sub>2</sub>O emissions and CH<sub>4</sub> uptake during maize production in the Great Rift Valley, Ethiopia, Biogeosciences, 17, 345–359, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-345-2020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.5194/bg-17-345-2020</ext-link>, 2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>Rochette, P., Angers, D. A., Bélanger, G., Chantigny, M. H., Prévost, D., and Lévesque, G.: Emissions of <inline-formula><mml:math id="M505" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> from Alfalfa and Soybean Crops in Eastern Canada, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 68, 493–506, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2004.4930" ext-link-type="DOI">10.2136/sssaj2004.4930</ext-link>, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>Ruan, L. and Philip Robertson, G.: Initial nitrous oxide, carbon dioxide, and methane costs of converting conservation reserve program grassland to row crops under no-till vs. conventional tillage, Glob. Chang. Biol., 19, 2478–2489, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12216" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/gcb.12216</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>Rusinamhodzi, L., Corbeels, M., Van Wijk, M. T., Rufino, M. C., Nyamangara, J., and Giller, K. E.: A meta-analysis of long-term effects of conservation agriculture on maize grain yield under rain-fed conditions, Agron. Sustain. Dev., 31, 657–673, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-011-0040-2" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/s13593-011-0040-2</ext-link>, 2011.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>Saggar, S., Jha, N., Deslippe, J., Bolan, N. S., Luo, J., Giltrap, D. L., Kim, D. G., Zaman, M., and Tillman, R. W.: Denitrification and <inline-formula><mml:math id="M506" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>: N<sub>2</sub> production in temperate grasslands: Processes, measurements, modelling and mitigating negative impacts, Sci. Total Environ., 465, 173–195, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.11.050" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.11.050</ext-link>, 2013.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>Scheer, C., Fuchs, K., Pelster, D. E., and Butterbach-Bahl, K.: Estimating global terrestrial denitrification from measured <inline-formula><mml:math id="M508" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula>:(<inline-formula><mml:math id="M509" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> <inline-formula><mml:math id="M510" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> N<sub>2</sub>) product ratios, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 47, 72–80, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2020.07.005" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.cosust.2020.07.005</ext-link>,  2020.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>Schmidt, H. P., Kammann, C., Hagemann, N., Leifeld, J., Bucheli, T. D., Sánchez Monedero, M. A., and Cayuela, M. L.: Biochar in agriculture – A systematic review of 26 global meta-analyses, GCB Bioenergy, 13, 1708–1730, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12889" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/gcbb.12889</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>Shakoor, A., Shahbaz, M., Farooq, T. H., Sahar, N. E., Shahzad, S. M., Altaf, M. M., and Ashraf, M.: A global meta-analysis of greenhouse gases emission and crop yield under no-tillage as compared to conventional tillage, Sci. Total Environ., 750, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142299" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142299</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>Tian, H., Xu, R., Canadell, J. G., Thompson, R. L., Winiwarter, W., Suntharalingam, P., Davidson, E. A., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B., Janssens-Maenhout, G., Prather, M. J., Regnier, P., Pan, N., Pan, S., Peters, G. P., Shi, H., Tubiello, F. N., Zaehle, S., Zhou, F., Arneth, A., Battaglia, G., Berthet, S., Bopp, L., Bouwman, A. F., Buitenhuis, E. T., Chang, J., Chipperfield, M. P., Dangal, S. R. S., Dlugokencky, E., Elkins, J. W., Eyre, B. D., Fu, B., Hall, B., Ito, A., Joos, F., Krummel, P. B., Landolfi, A., Laruelle, G. G., Lauerwald, R., Li, W., Lienert, S., Maavara, T., MacLeod, M., Millet, D. B., Olin, S., Patra, P. K., Prinn, R. G., Raymond, P. A., Ruiz, D. J., van der Werf, G. R., Vuichard, N., Wang, J., Weiss, R. F., Wells, K. C., Wilson, C., Yang, J., and Yao, Y.: A comprehensive quantification of global nitrous oxide sources and sinks, Nature, 586, 248–256, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2780-0" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1038/s41586-020-2780-0</ext-link>, 2020. </mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>Turmel, M. S., Speratti, A., Baudron, F., Verhulst, N., and Govaerts, B.: Crop residue management and soil health: A systems analysis, Agric. Syst., 134, 6–16, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2014.05.009" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.agsy.2014.05.009</ext-link>, 2015.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>Wang, H., Yan, Z., Ju, X., Song, X., Zhang, J., Li, S., and Zhu-Barker, X.: Quantifying nitrous oxide production rates from nitrification and denitrification under various moisture conditions in agricultural soils: Laboratory study and literature synthesis, Front. Microbiol., 13, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.1110151" ext-link-type="DOI">10.3389/fmicb.2022.1110151</ext-link>, 2023.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>Wang, Y., Guo, J., Vogt, R. D., Mulder, J., Wang, J., and Zhang, X.: Soil pH as the chief modifier for regional nitrous oxide emissions: New evidence and implications for global estimates and mitigation, Glob. Chang. Biol., 24, e617–e626, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13966" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/gcb.13966</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>Weldon, S., van der Veen, B., Farkas, E., Kocatürk-Schumacher, N. P., Dieguez-Alonso, A., Budai, A., and Rasse, D.: A re-analysis of NH4<inline-formula><mml:math id="M512" display="inline"><mml:mo>+</mml:mo></mml:math></inline-formula> sorption on biochar: Have expectations been too high?, Chemosphere, 301, 134662, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134662" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134662</ext-link>, 2022.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>Wickham, H.: ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis, Springer-Verlag, New York, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98141-3" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/978-0-387-98141-3</ext-link>, 2016.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>Wortmann, C. S. and Eledu, C. A.: Uganda's Agroecological Zones: A guide for planners and policy makers, CIAT, <uri>https://hdl.handle.net/10568/54311</uri>, 1999.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>Wrage-Mönnig, N., Horn, M. A., Well, R., Müller, C., Velthof, G., and Oenema, O.: The role of nitrifier denitrification in the production of nitrous oxide revisited, Soil Biol. Biochem., 123, A3–A16, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.03.020" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.03.020</ext-link>, 2018.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>Yao, Z., Guo, H., Wang, Y., Zhan, Y., Zhang, T., Wang, Zheng, X., Butterbach-Bahl, K.: A global meta-analysis of yield-scaled <inline-formula><mml:math id="M513" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and its mitigation efforts for maize, wheat, and rice, Glob. Change Biol., 30, e17177, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.17177" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/gcb.17177</ext-link>, 2024.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><mixed-citation>Zhang, L., Jing, Y., Chen, C., Xiang, Y., Rezaei Rashti, M., Li, Y., Deng, Q., and Zhang, R.: Effects of biochar application on soil nitrogen transformation, microbial functional genes, enzyme activity, and plant nitrogen uptake: A meta-analysis of field studies, Glob. Change Biol., 13,  1859–1873, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12898" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1111/gcbb.12898</ext-link>, 2021.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><mixed-citation>Žurovec, O., Sitaula, B. K., Čustović, H., Žurovec, J., and Dörsch, P.: Effects of tillage practice on soil structure, <inline-formula><mml:math id="M514" display="inline"><mml:mrow class="chem"><mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">N</mml:mi><mml:mn mathvariant="normal">2</mml:mn></mml:msub><mml:mi mathvariant="normal">O</mml:mi></mml:mrow></mml:math></inline-formula> emissions and economics in cereal production under current socio-economic conditions in central Bosnia and Herzegovina, PLoS One, 12, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187681" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1371/journal.pone.0187681</ext-link>, 2017.</mixed-citation></ref>
      <ref id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><mixed-citation>Zuur, A. F., Ieno, E. N., Walker, N., Saveliev, A. A., and Smith, G. M.: Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R, Springer New York, New York, NY, <ext-link xlink:href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-87458-6" ext-link-type="DOI">10.1007/978-0-387-87458-6</ext-link>, 2009.</mixed-citation></ref>

  </ref-list></back>
    <!--<article-title-html>Nitrous oxide emissions from pigeon pea–maize rotation in response to conservation agriculture and biochar amendments in a Ferralsol, northern Uganda</article-title-html>
<abstract-html/>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation>
      
Abalos, D., Recous, S., Butterbach-Bahl, K., De Notaris, C., Rittl, T. F.,
Topp, C. F. E., Petersen, S. O., Hansen, S., Bleken, M. A., Rees, R. M., and
Olesen, J. E.: A review and meta-analysis of mitigation measures for nitrous
oxide emissions from crop residues, Sci. Total Environ., 828,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154388" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.154388</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation>
      
Adegbeye, M. J., Ravi Kanth Reddy, P., Obaisi, A. I., Elghandour, M. M. M.
Y., Oyebamiji, K. J., Salem, A. Z. M., Morakinyo-Fasipe, O. T.,
Cipriano-Salazar, M., and Camacho-Díaz, L. M.: Sustainable agriculture
options for production, greenhouse gasses and pollution alleviation, and
nutrient recycling in emerging and transitional nations – An overview, J. Clean. Prod., 242, 118319,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118319" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.118319</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation>
      
Adu-Gyamfi, J. J., Myaka, F. A., Sakala, W. D., Odgaard, R., Vesterager, J. M., and
Høgh-Jensen, H.: Biological nitrogen fixation and nitrogen and
phosphorus budgets in farmer-managed intercrops of maize-pigeonpea in
semi-arid southern and eastern Africa, Plant Soil, 295, 127–136,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-007-9270-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-007-9270-0</a>, 2007.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation>
      
Africa Union: Africa fertilizer and soil health summit, Nairobi, 1–53 pp.,
2024.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation>
      
Aho, K., Derryberry, D., and Peterson, T.: Model selection for ecologists:
the worldviews of AIC and BIC, Ecology, 95, 631–636, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation>
      
Baggs, E. M., Chebii, J., and Ndufa, J. K.: A short-term investigation of
trace gas emissions following tillage and no-tillage of agroforestry
residues in western Kenya, Soil Till. Res., 90, 69–76,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2005.08.006" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.still.2005.08.006</a>, 2006.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation>
      
Bates, D. M.: lme4: Mixed-effects modeling with R, <a href="http://lme4.r-forge.r-project.org/book/" target="_blank"/> (last access: 17 April 2025), 2010.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation>
      
Boateng, K. K., Obeng, G. Y., and Mensah, E.: Agricultural Greenhouse Gases
from Sub-Saharan Africa, in: Energy, Environment, and Sustainability,
Springer Nature, 73–85,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3272-2_6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-3272-2_6</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation>
      
Borchard, N., Schirrmann, M., Cayuela, M. L., Kammann, C., Wrage-Mönnig, N., Estavillo, J. M., Fuertes-Mendizábal, T., Sigua, G., Spokas, K., Ippolito, J. A., and Novak, J.: Biochar, soil and land-use interactions that reduce nitrate leaching and N<sub>2</sub>O emissions: a meta-analysis, Sci. Total Environ., 651, 2354–2364, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.060" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.10.060</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation>
      
Bwana, T. N., Amuri, N. A., Semu, E., Elsgaard, L., Butterbach-Bahl, K., Pelster, D. E., and Olesen, J. E.: Soil N<sub>2</sub>O emission from organic and conventional cotton farming in Northern Tanzania, Sci. Total Environ., 785, 1–10, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147301" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.147301</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation>
      
Case, S. D. C., McNamara, N. P., Reay, D. S., Stott, A. W., Grant, H. K.,
and Whitaker, J.: Biochar suppresses N<sub>2</sub>O emissions while maintaining N
availability in a sandy loam soil, Soil Biol. Biochem., 81, 178–185,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2014.11.012" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2014.11.012</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation>
      
Chapuis-Lardy, L., Metay, A., Martinet, M., Rabenarivo, M., Toucet, J.,
Douzet, J. M., Razafimbelo, T., Rabeharisoa, L., and Rakotoarisoa, J.:
Nitrous oxide fluxes from Malagasy agricultural soils, Geoderma, 148,
421–427, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2008.11.015" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2008.11.015</a>, 2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation>
      
Cornelissen, G., Pandit, N. R., Taylor, P., Pandit, B. H., Sparrevik, M.,
and Schmidt, H. P.: Emissions and char quality of flame-curtain “Kon Tiki”
kilns for farmer-scale charcoal/biochar production, PLoS One, 11,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154617" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0154617</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation>
      
Craine, J. M., Brookshire, E. N. J., Cramer, M. D., Hasselquist, N. J.,
Koba, K., Marin-Spiotta, E., and Wang, L.: Ecological interpretations of
nitrogen isotope ratios of terrestrial plants and soils, Plant Soil, 396, 1–26,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-015-2542-1" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-015-2542-1</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation>
      
Daryanto, S., Wang, L., Gilhooly, W. P., and Jacinthe, P.: Nitrogen preference across generations under changing ammonium nitrate ratios, J. Plant Ecol., 12, 235–244, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1093/jpe/rty014" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1093/jpe/rty014</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation>
      
Dick, J., Kaya, B., Soutoura, M., Skiba, U., Smith, R., Niang, A., and Tabo,
R.: The contribution of agricultural practices to nitrous oxide emissions in
semi-arid Mali, Soil Use Manag., 24, 292–301,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-2743.2008.00163.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-2743.2008.00163.x</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation>
      
Falconnier, G.N., Cardinael, R., Corbeels, M., Baudron, F., Chivenge, P.,
Couëdel, A., Ripoche, A., Affholder, F., Naudin, K.,
Benaillon, E., Rusinamhodzi, L., Leroux, L., Vanlauwe, B., and Giller, K. E.: The
input reduction principle of agroecology is wrong when it comes to mineral
fertilizer use in sub-Saharan Africa, Outlook Agric.,  52, 311–326, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/00307270231199795" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1177/00307270231199795</a>, 2023.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation>
      
Fang, H., Mo, J., Peng, S., Li, Z., and Wang, H.: Cumulative effects of
nitrogen additions on litter decomposition in three tropical forests in
southern China, Plant Soil, 297, 233–242,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-007-9339-9" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-007-9339-9</a>, 2007.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation>
      
Fungo, B., Lehmann, J., Kalbitz, K., Tenywa, M., Thionìo, M., and
Neufeldt, H.: Emissions intensity and carbon stocks of a tropical Ultisol
after amendment with Tithonia green manure, urea and biochar, Field Crops
Res., 209, 179–188, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.05.013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2017.05.013</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation>
      
Fungo, B., Lehmann, J., Kalbitz, K., Thionìo, M., Tenywa, M., Okeyo,
I., and Neufeldt, H.: Ammonia and nitrous oxide emissions from a field
Ultisol amended with tithonia green manure, urea, and biochar, Biol. Fertil.
Soils, 55, 135–148, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-018-01338-3" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s00374-018-01338-3</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation>
      
Gee, G. W. and Bauder, J. W.: Particle size analysis, in:
Methods of Soil Analysis, Part 1, edited by: Klute, A., Am. Soc. Agron., Madison, WI, 383–411
pp., 1986.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation>
      
Giller, K. E., Andersson, J. A., Corbeels, M., Kirkegaard, J., Mortensen,
D., Erenstein, O., and Vanlauwe, B.: Beyond conservation agriculture, Front. Plant Sci., 6,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00870" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3389/fpls.2015.00870</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation>
      
Glaser, B., Haumaier, L., Guggenberger, G., and Zech, W.: The `Terra Preta' phenomenon: a model for sustainable agriculture in the humid tropics, Naturwissenschaften, 88, 37–41, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s001140000193" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s001140000193</a>, 2001.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation>
      
Guenet, B., Gabrielle, B., Chenu, C., Arrouays, D., Balesdent, J., Bernoux,
M., Bruni, E., Caliman, J. P., Cardinael, R., Chen, S., Ciais, P., Desbois,
D., Fouche, J., Frank, S., Henault, C., Lugato, E., Naipal, V., Nesme, T.,
Obersteiner, M., Pellerin, S., Powlson, D. S., Rasse, D. P., Rees, F.,
Soussana, J. F., Su, Y., Tian, H., Valin, H., and Zhou, F.: Can N<sub>2</sub>O
emissions offset the benefits from soil organic carbon storage?, Glob. Change Biol., 27, 237–256,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15342" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15342</a>,  2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hao, Y., Mao, J., Bachmann, C. M., Hoffman, F. M., Koren, G., Chen, H.,
Tian, H., Liu, J., Tao, J., Tang, J., Li, L., Liu, L., Apple, M., Shi, M.,
Jin, M., Zhu, Q., Kannenberg, S., Shi, X., Zhang, X., Wang, Y., Fang, Y.,
and Dai, Y.: Soil moisture controls over carbon sequestration and greenhouse
gas emissions: a review, npj Climate and Atmospheric Science. 8,  16, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-024-00888-8" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41612-024-00888-8</a>,  2025.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hickman, J. E., Havlikova, M., Kroeze, C., and Palm, C. A.: Current and
future nitrous oxide emissions from African agriculture, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 3,  370–378,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2011.08.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2011.08.001</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hickman, J. E., Tully, K. L., Groffman, P. M., Diru, W., and Palm, C. A.: A potential tipping point in tropical agriculture: Avoiding rapid increases in nitrous oxide fluxes from agricultural intensification in Kenya, J. Geophys. Res.-Biogeo., 120, 938–951, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JG002913" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/2015JG002913</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hobbs, P. R., Sayre, K., and Gupta, R.: The role of conservation agriculture
in sustainable agriculture, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B., 363, 543–555, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2169" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2169</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation>
      
Hothorn, T., Bretz, F., and Westfall, P.: Simultaneous inference in general
parametric models, Biometrical J., 50, 346–363, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/bimj.200810425" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/bimj.200810425</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation>
      
IPCC: N<sub>2</sub>O emissions from managed soils, and CO<sub>2</sub> emissions from
lime and urea application, in: 2019 Refinement to the 2006 IPCC Guidelines
for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories, edited by: Buendia, E. C., Tanabe, K., Kranjc, A., Jamsranjav, B., Fukuda, M., Ngarize, S., Osako, A., Pyrozhenko, Y., Shermanau, P., and Federici, S., IPCC, Switzerland, ISBN 978-4-88788-232-4, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation>
      
Jantalia, C. P., Dos Santos, H. P., Urquiaga, S., Boddey, R. M., and Alves,
B. J. R.: Fluxes of nitrous oxide from soil under different crop rotations
and tillage systems in the South of Brazil, Nutr. Cycl. Agroecosyst., 82,
161–173, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-008-9178-y" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s10705-008-9178-y</a>, 2008.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation>
      
Jeffery, S., Bezemer, T. M., Cornelissen, G., Kuyper, T. W., Lehmann, J.,
Mommer, L., Sohi, S. P., van de Voorde, T. F. J., Wardle, D. A., and van
Groenigen, J. W.: The way forward in biochar research: Targeting trade-offs
between the potential wins, GCB Bioenergy, 7, 1–13,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12132" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12132</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation>
      
Jensen, E. S., Peoples, M. B., Boddey, R. M., Gresshoff, P. M., Henrik, H.
N., Alves, B. J. R., and Morrison, M. J.: Legumes for mitigation of climate
change and the provision of feedstock for biofuels and biorefineries. A
review, Agron. Sustain. Dev., 32, 329–364, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-011-0056-7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-011-0056-7</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation>
      
Jeuffroy, M. H., Baranger, E., Carrouée, B., de Chezelles, E., Gosme, M., Hénault, C., Schneider, A., and Cellier, P.: Nitrous oxide emissions from crop rotations including wheat, oilseed rape and dry peas, Biogeosciences, 10, 1787–1797, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-1787-2013" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-10-1787-2013</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kaizzi, K. C., Byalebeka, J., Semalulu, O., Alou, I., Zimwanguyizza, W.,
Nansamba, A., Musinguzi, P., Ebanyat, P., Hyuha, T., and Wortmann, C. S.:
Maize response to fertilizer and nitrogen use efficiency in Uganda, Agron. J.,
104, 73–82, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2011.0181" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2134/agronj2011.0181</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kammann, C., Ippolito, J., Hagemann, N., Borchard, N., Cayuela, M. L.,
Estavillo, J. M., Fuertes-Mendizabal, T., Jeffery, S., Kern, J., Novak, J.,
Rasse, D., Saarnio, S., Schmidt, H. P., Spokas, K., and Wrage-Mönnig,
N.: Biochar as a tool to reduce the agricultural greenhouse-gas
burden–knowns, unknowns and future research needs, J. Environ.
Eng. Landsc., 25, 114–139,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3846/16486897.2017.1319375" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3846/16486897.2017.1319375</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kanissery, R., Gairhe, B., Kadyampakeni, D., Batuman, O., and Alferez, F.:
Glyphosate: Its environmental persistence and impact on crop health and
nutrition, Plants, 8, 1–11, <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/plants8110499" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3390/plants8110499</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kim, D.-G., Thomas, A. D., Pelster, D., Rosenstock, T. S., and Sanz-Cobena, A.: Greenhouse gas emissions from natural ecosystems and agricultural lands in sub-Saharan Africa: synthesis of available data and suggestions for further research, Biogeosciences, 13, 4789–4809, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-4789-2016" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-13-4789-2016</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation>
      
Kumar Rao, J. V. D. K. and Dart, P. J.: Nodulation, nitrogen fixation and
nitrogen uptake in pigeonpea (<i>Cajanus cajan</i> (L.) Millsp) of different
maturity groups, Plant Soil, 99, 255–266, 1987.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lehmann, J.: A handful of carbon, Nature, 143–144,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/447143a" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/447143a</a>, 2007.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lenth, R. V.: Least-Squares Means: The R Package lsmeans, J. Stat. Softw., 69, 1–33, <a href="https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v069.i01" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v069.i01</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation>
      
Lentz, R. D., Ippolito, J. A., and Spokas, K. A.: Biochar and Manure Effects
on Net Nitrogen Mineralization and Greenhouse Gas Emissions from Calcareous
Soil under Corn, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J., 78, 1641–1655,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2014.05.0198" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2014.05.0198</a>, 2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation>
      
Liu, Q., Zhang, Y., Liu, B., Amonette, J. E., Lin, Z., Liu, G., Ambus, P., and Xie, Z.: How does biochar influence soil N cycle? A meta-analysis, Plant Soil, 426, 211–225, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-018-3619-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-018-3619-4</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation>
      
Mapanda, F., Wuta, M., Nyamangara, J., and Rees, R. M.: Effects of organic
and mineral fertilizer nitrogen on greenhouse gas emissions and
plant-captured carbon during maize cropping in Zimbabwe, Plant
Soil, 343, 67–81, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-011-0753-7" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-011-0753-7</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation>
      
Martinsen, V., Mulder, J., Shitumbanuma, V., Sparrevik, M., Børresen, T.,
and Cornelissen, G.: Farmer-led maize biochar trials: Effect on crop yield
and soil nutrients under conservation farming, J. Plant Nutr. Soil Sci., 177, 681–695, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.201300590" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1002/jpln.201300590</a>,
2014.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation>
      
Martinsen, V., Shitumbanuma, V., Mulder, J., Ritz, C., and Cornelissen, G.:
Effects of hand-hoe tilled conservation farming on soil quality and carbon
stocks under on-farm conditions in Zambia, Agric. Ecosyst. Environ., 241,
168–178, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.03.010" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2017.03.010</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation>
      
Meier, E. A., Thorburn, P. J., Bell, L. W., Harrison, M. T., and Biggs, J.
S.: Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Cropping and Grazed Pastures Are Similar:
A Simulation Analysis in Australia, Front. Sustain. Food Syst., 3, 1–18,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2019.00121" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3389/fsufs.2019.00121</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation>
      
Millar, N., Ndufa, J. K., Cadisch, G., and Baggs, E. M.: Nitrous oxide emissions following incorporation of improved fallow residues in the humid tropics, Global Biogeochem. Cycles, 18, 1–9, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GB002114" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1029/2003GB002114</a>, 2004.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation>
      
Mubiru, D. N., Komutunga, E., Agona, A., Apok, A., Ngara, T., and Mubiru,
D.: Characterising agrometeorological climate risks and uncertainties: Crop
production in Uganda, S. Afr. J. Sci., 108, <a href="https://doi.org/10.4102/sajs" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.4102/sajs</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation>
      
Munera-Echeverri, J. L., Martinsen, V., Strand, L. T., Cornelissen, G., and
Mulder, J.: Effect of conservation farming and biochar addition on soil
organic carbon quality, nitrogen mineralization, and crop productivity in a
light textured Acrisol in the sub-humid tropics, PLoS One, 15, 1–17,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228717" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228717</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation>
      
Munera-Echeverri, J. L., Martinsen, V., Dörsch, P., Obia, A., and
Mulder, J.: Pigeon pea biochar addition in tropical Arenosol under maize
increases gross nitrification rate without an effect on nitrous oxide
emission, Plant Soil, 474, 195–212,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-022-05325-4" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s11104-022-05325-4</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation>
      
Namatsheve, T.: Biological N<sub>2</sub>-fixation, grain yield and N<sub>2</sub>O
emissions: the role of conservation agriculture and biochar in unfertilized
tropical soils, PhD thesis, Norwegian University of Life Sciences, 2025.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation>
      
Namatsheve, T., Chikowo, R., Corbeels, M., Mouquet-Rivier, C.,
Icard-Vernière, C., Cardinael, R., Icard-Verniere, C., and Cardinael,
R.: Maize-cowpea intercropping as an ecological intensification option for
low input systems in sub-humid Zimbabwe: Productivity, biological
N2-fixation and grain mineral content, Field Crops Res., 263, 1–21,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2020.108052" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2020.108052</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation>
      
Namatsheve, T., Martinsen, V., Obia, A., and Mulder, J.: Grain yield and
nitrogen cycling under conservation agriculture and biochar amendment in
agroecosystems of sub-Saharan Africa. A meta-analysis, Agric. Ecosyst.
Environ., 376, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2024.109243" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agee.2024.109243</a>, 2024.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation>
      
Namatsheve, T., Mulder, J., Obia, A., and Martinsen, V.: Biological
N<sub>2</sub>-fixation and grain yield of pigeon pea: The role of biochar and
conservation agriculture in low-input systems, Field Crops Res., 328, 109923,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2025.109923" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fcr.2025.109923</a>, 2025.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation>
      
Namatsheve, T., Martinsen, V., Mulder, J, Obia, A., and Dörsch, P.: Data
for: Nitrous oxide emissions from pigeon pea–maize rotation in response
to conservation agriculture and biochar amendments in a Ferralsol, northern
Uganda, NMBU dataverse [data set], <a href="https://doi.org/10.18710/CNP8TF" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.18710/CNP8TF</a>, 2026.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation>
      
Namoi, N., Pelster, D., Rosenstock, T. S., Mwangi, L., Kamau, S., Mutuo, P.,
and Barrios, E.: Earthworms regulate ability of biochar to mitigate CO<sub>2</sub> and
N<sub>2</sub>O emissions from a tropical soil, Appl. Soil Ecol., 140, 57–67,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2019.04.001" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apsoil.2019.04.001</a>, 2019.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation>
      
Nguyen, T. T. N., Xu, C. Y., Tahmasbian, I., Che, R., Xu, Z., Zhou, X.,
Wallace, H. M., and Bai, S. H.: Effects of biochar on soil available
inorganic nitrogen: A review and meta-analysis, Geoderma, 288,  79–96,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.11.004" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoderma.2016.11.004</a>,  2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation>
      
Oriangi, G., Mukwaya, P. I., Luwa, J. K., Menya, E., Malinga, G. M., and
Bamutaze, Y.: Variability and Changes in Climate in Northern Uganda,
African Journal of Climate Change and Resource Sustainability, 3, 81–97,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.37284/ajccrs.3.1.1830" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.37284/ajccrs.3.1.1830</a>, 2024.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation>
      
Pittelkow, C. M., Liang, X., Linquist, B. A., Van Groenigen, L. J., Lee, J.,
Lundy, M. E., Van Gestel, N., Six, J., Venterea, R. T., and Van Kessel, C.:
Productivity limits and potentials of the principles of conservation
agriculture, Nature, 517, 365–368, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13809" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13809</a>,
2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation>
      
Portmann, R. W., Daniel, J. S., and Ravishankara, A. R.: Stratospheric ozone
depletion due to nitrous oxide: Influences of other gases, Philos.
T. R. Soc. B, 367, 1256–1264,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0377" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0377</a>, 2012.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation>
      
Powlson, D. S., Whitmore, A. P., and Goulding, K. W. T.: Soil carbon
sequestration to mitigate climate change: A critical re-examination to
identify the true and the false, Eur. J. Soil Sci., 62, 42–55,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2010.01342.x" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2389.2010.01342.x</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation>
      
Raji, S. G. and Dörsch, P.: Effect of legume intercropping on N<sub>2</sub>O emissions and CH<sub>4</sub> uptake during maize production in the Great Rift Valley, Ethiopia, Biogeosciences, 17, 345–359, <a href="https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-345-2020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-17-345-2020</a>, 2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation>
      
Rochette, P., Angers, D. A., Bélanger, G., Chantigny, M. H.,
Prévost, D., and Lévesque, G.: Emissions of N<sub>2</sub>O from Alfalfa and
Soybean Crops in Eastern Canada, Soil Sci. Soc. Am. J.,
68, 493–506, <a href="https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2004.4930" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj2004.4930</a>, 2004.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation>
      
Ruan, L. and Philip Robertson, G.: Initial nitrous oxide, carbon dioxide,
and methane costs of converting conservation reserve program grassland to
row crops under no-till vs. conventional tillage, Glob. Chang. Biol., 19,
2478–2489, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12216" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.12216</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation>
      
Rusinamhodzi, L., Corbeels, M., Van Wijk, M. T., Rufino, M. C., Nyamangara,
J., and Giller, K. E.: A meta-analysis of long-term effects of conservation
agriculture on maize grain yield under rain-fed conditions, Agron. Sustain. Dev., 31, 657–673,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-011-0040-2" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-011-0040-2</a>, 2011.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation>
      
Saggar, S., Jha, N., Deslippe, J., Bolan, N. S., Luo, J., Giltrap, D. L.,
Kim, D. G., Zaman, M., and Tillman, R. W.: Denitrification and N<sub>2</sub>O: N<sub>2</sub>
production in temperate grasslands: Processes, measurements, modelling and
mitigating negative impacts, Sci. Total Environ., 465,
173–195, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.11.050" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2012.11.050</a>, 2013.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation>
      
Scheer, C., Fuchs, K., Pelster, D. E., and Butterbach-Bahl, K.: Estimating
global terrestrial denitrification from measured N<sub>2</sub>O:(N<sub>2</sub>O + N<sub>2</sub>) product
ratios, Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 47, 72–80, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2020.07.005" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2020.07.005</a>,  2020.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation>
      
Schmidt, H. P., Kammann, C., Hagemann, N., Leifeld, J., Bucheli, T. D.,
Sánchez Monedero, M. A., and Cayuela, M. L.: Biochar in agriculture – A
systematic review of 26 global meta-analyses, GCB Bioenergy, 13, 1708–1730,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12889" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12889</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation>
      
Shakoor, A., Shahbaz, M., Farooq, T. H., Sahar, N. E., Shahzad, S. M.,
Altaf, M. M., and Ashraf, M.: A global meta-analysis of greenhouse gases
emission and crop yield under no-tillage as compared to conventional
tillage, Sci. Total Environ., 750,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142299" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.142299</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation>
      
Tian, H., Xu, R., Canadell, J. G., Thompson, R. L., Winiwarter, W.,
Suntharalingam, P., Davidson, E. A., Ciais, P., Jackson, R. B.,
Janssens-Maenhout, G., Prather, M. J., Regnier, P., Pan, N., Pan, S.,
Peters, G. P., Shi, H., Tubiello, F. N., Zaehle, S., Zhou, F., Arneth, A.,
Battaglia, G., Berthet, S., Bopp, L., Bouwman, A. F., Buitenhuis, E. T.,
Chang, J., Chipperfield, M. P., Dangal, S. R. S., Dlugokencky, E., Elkins,
J. W., Eyre, B. D., Fu, B., Hall, B., Ito, A., Joos, F., Krummel, P. B.,
Landolfi, A., Laruelle, G. G., Lauerwald, R., Li, W., Lienert, S., Maavara,
T., MacLeod, M., Millet, D. B., Olin, S., Patra, P. K., Prinn, R. G.,
Raymond, P. A., Ruiz, D. J., van der Werf, G. R., Vuichard, N., Wang, J.,
Weiss, R. F., Wells, K. C., Wilson, C., Yang, J., and Yao, Y.: A
comprehensive quantification of global nitrous oxide sources and sinks,
Nature, 586, 248–256, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2780-0" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2780-0</a>, 2020.


    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation>
      
Turmel, M. S., Speratti, A., Baudron, F., Verhulst, N., and Govaerts, B.:
Crop residue management and soil health: A systems analysis, Agric. Syst.,
134, 6–16, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2014.05.009" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2014.05.009</a>, 2015.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wang, H., Yan, Z., Ju, X., Song, X., Zhang, J., Li, S., and Zhu-Barker, X.:
Quantifying nitrous oxide production rates from nitrification and
denitrification under various moisture conditions in agricultural soils:
Laboratory study and literature synthesis, Front. Microbiol., 13,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.1110151" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2022.1110151</a>, 2023.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wang, Y., Guo, J., Vogt, R. D., Mulder, J., Wang, J., and Zhang, X.: Soil pH
as the chief modifier for regional nitrous oxide emissions: New evidence and
implications for global estimates and mitigation, Glob. Chang. Biol., 24,
e617–e626, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13966" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13966</a>, 2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation>
      
Weldon, S., van der Veen, B., Farkas, E., Kocatürk-Schumacher, N. P.,
Dieguez-Alonso, A., Budai, A., and Rasse, D.: A re-analysis of NH4+
sorption on biochar: Have expectations been too high?, Chemosphere, 301, 134662,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134662" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134662</a>, 2022.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wickham, H.: ggplot2: Elegant Graphics for Data Analysis, Springer-Verlag,
New York, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98141-3" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-98141-3</a>, 2016.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wortmann, C. S. and Eledu, C. A.: Uganda's Agroecological Zones: A guide for
planners and policy makers, CIAT, <a href="https://hdl.handle.net/10568/54311" target="_blank"/>, 1999.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation>
      
Wrage-Mönnig, N., Horn, M. A., Well, R., Müller, C., Velthof, G.,
and Oenema, O.: The role of nitrifier denitrification in the production of
nitrous oxide revisited, Soil Biol. Biochem., 123, A3–A16, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.03.020" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.soilbio.2018.03.020</a>,
2018.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation>
      
Yao, Z., Guo, H., Wang, Y., Zhan, Y., Zhang, T., Wang, Zheng, X.,
Butterbach-Bahl, K.: A global meta-analysis of yield-scaled N<sub>2</sub>O
emissions and its mitigation efforts for maize, wheat, and rice, Glob.
Change Biol., 30, e17177, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.17177" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.17177</a>, 2024.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib80"><label>80</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zhang, L., Jing, Y., Chen, C., Xiang, Y., Rezaei Rashti, M., Li, Y., Deng,
Q., and Zhang, R.: Effects of biochar application on soil nitrogen
transformation, microbial functional genes, enzyme activity, and plant
nitrogen uptake: A meta-analysis of field studies, Glob. Change Biol., 13,  1859–1873,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12898" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1111/gcbb.12898</a>, 2021.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib81"><label>81</label><mixed-citation>
      
Žurovec, O., Sitaula, B. K., Čustović, H., Žurovec, J., and
Dörsch, P.: Effects of tillage practice on soil structure, N<sub>2</sub>O emissions
and economics in cereal production under current socio-economic conditions
in central Bosnia and Herzegovina, PLoS One, 12,
<a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187681" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0187681</a>, 2017.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>
<ref-html id="bib1.bib82"><label>82</label><mixed-citation>
      
Zuur, A. F., Ieno, E. N., Walker, N., Saveliev, A. A., and Smith, G. M.:
Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R, Springer New York,
New York, NY, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-87458-6" target="_blank">https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-87458-6</a>, 2009.

    </mixed-citation></ref-html>--></article>
