Redefinition and global estimation of basal ecosystem respiration rate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
[1] Basal ecosystem respiration rate (BR), the ecosystem respiration rate at a given temperature, is a common and important parameter in empirical models for quantifying ecosystem respiration (ER) globally. Numerous studies have indicated that BR varies in space. However, many empirical ER models still use a global constant BR largely due to the lack of a functional description for BR. In this study, we redefined BR to be ecosystem respiration rate at the mean annual temperature. To test the validity of this concept, we conducted a synthesis analysis using 276 site-years of eddy covariance data, from 79 research sites located at latitudes ranging from ∼3°S to ∼70°N. Results showed that mean annual ER rate closely matches ER rate at mean annual temperature. Incorporation of site-specific BR into global ER model substantially improved simulated ER compared to an invariant BR at all sites. These results confirm that ER at the mean annual temperature can be considered as BR in empirical models. A strong correlation was found between the mean annual ER and mean annual gross primary production (GPP). Consequently, GPP, which is typically more accurately modeled, can be used to estimate BR. A light use efficiency GPP model (i.e., EC-LUE) was applied to estimate global GPP, BR and ER with input data from MERRA (Modern Era Retrospective-Analysis for Research and Applications) and MODIS (Moderate resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer). The global ER was 103 Pg C yr −1, with the highest respiration rate over tropical forests and the lowest value in dry and high-latitude areas.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".