MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W120391082 · doi:10.2172/912697

TCP Final Report: Measuring the Effects of Stand Age and Soil Drainage on Boreal Forest

2007· report· en· W120391082 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael L. Goulden

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereport
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEddy covarianceBorealTaigaEnvironmental scienceCarbon fluxForestryDisturbance (geology)Carbon fibersEcological successionCarbon cycleEcologyAtmospheric sciencesGeographyEcosystemBiologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This was a 6-year research project in the Canadian boreal forest that focused on using field observations to understand how boreal forest carbon balance changes during recovery from catastrophic forest fire. The project began with two overarching goals: (1) to develop techniques that would all the year round operation of 7 eddy covariance sites in a harsh environment at a much lower cost than had previously been possible, and (2) to use these measurements to determine how carbon balance changes during secondary succession. The project ended in 2006, having accomplished its primary objectives. Key contributions to DOE during the study were: (1) Design, test, and demonstrate a lightweight, fully portable eddy flux system that exploits several economies of scale to allow AmeriFlux-quality measurements of CO{sub 2} exchange at many sites for a large reduction in cost (Goulden et al. 2006). (2) Added seven year-round sites to AmeriFlux, at a relatively low per site cost using the Eddy Covariance Mesonet approach (Goulden et al. 2006). These data are freely available on the AmeriFlux web site. (3) Tested and rejected the conventional wisdom that forests lose large amounts of carbon during the first decade after disturbance, then accumulate large amounts of carbon for {approx}several decades, and then return to steady state in old age. Rather, we found that boreal forests recovers quickly from fire and begins to accumulate carbon within {approx}5 years after disturbance. Additionally, we found no evidence that carbon accumulation declines in old stands (Goulden et al. 2006, Goulden et al. in prep). (4) Tested and rejected claims based on remote sensing observations (for example, Myneni et al 1996 using AVHRR) that regions of boreal forest have changed markedly in the last 20 years. Rather, we assembled a much richer data set than had been used in the past (eddy covariance observations, tree rings, biomass, NPP, AVHRR, and LandSat), which we used to establish that the forests in our study region have remained largely constant over the last 20 years after accounting for the effects of stand age and succession (McMillen et al. in review).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.252
Threshold uncertainty score0.500

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.227 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→