Annual and seasonal variability in evapotranspiration and water table at a shrub‐covered bog in southern Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Evapotranspiration (ET) was measured via the eddy covariance technique at a shrub bog peatland in southeastern Ontario for 5 years. For most of the study period the temperature was above normal. Precipitation was variable, but, in 2 years, late summer dry periods resulted in an extended period of deep drawdown of the water table (WT). Growing‐season (May–September) daily ET varied considerably; maximum ET rates were 4 to 5 mm day−1. Winter ET rates were an order of magnitude smaller than in summer, yet the total winter ET loss was important, accounting for 23 to 30% of the annual ET water loss. Annual precipitation exceeded annual ET by 1·55 to 1·94 times. During the growing season, daily ET was closely related to daily potential evaporation (PET); however, the slope of this relationship was statistically different in some years. In contrast, ET and WT were only weakly related in most years. When ET was sorted into 5 cm WT classes there was no difference in mean ET across most WT classes; only the two deepest WT classes had significantly smaller mean ET. The ratio ET/PET followed the same pattern. We present a conceptual model of ET that relates WT, soil hydraulic properties and moss and vascular plant processes. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".