Bryophyte‐cyanobacteria associations as regulators of the northern latitude carbon balance in response to global change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ecosystems in the far north, including arctic and boreal biomes, are a globally significant pool of carbon (C). Global change is proposed to influence both C uptake and release in these ecosystems, thereby potentially affecting whether they act as C sources or sinks. Bryophytes (i.e., mosses) serve a variety of key functions in these systems, including their association with nitrogen (N2 )-fixing cyanobacteria, as thermal insulators of the soil, and producers of recalcitrant litter, which have implications for both net primary productivity (NPP) and heterotrophic respiration. While ground-cover bryophytes typically make up a small proportion of the total biomass in northern systems, their combined physical structure and N2 -fixing capabilities facilitate a disproportionally large impact on key processes that control ecosystem C and N cycles. As such, the response of bryophyte-cyanobacteria associations to global change may influence whether and how ecosystem C balances are influenced by global change. Here, we review what is known about their occurrence and N2 -fixing activity, and how bryophyte systems will respond to several key global change factors. We explore the implications these responses may have in determining how global change influences C balances in high northern latitudes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".