Belowground biomass, production, and carbon cycling in mature Norway spruce, Maine, U.S.A.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two 55-year-old stands of Norway spruce (Picea abies (L.) Karst.) were sampled to determine belowground biomass, production and decomposition of fine and small roots, litterfall and litter decay rates, soil respiration rates, and carbon cycling patterns. Mean biomass of live fine (<1 mm) Norway spruce roots to a soil depth of 40 cm was 359 ash-free dry g·m2, whereas biomass of live fine + small roots ([Formula: see text]3 mm) amounted to 561 g·m2. Mean root production averaged 297 g·m2·year1for roots <1 mm and 418 g·m2·year1for roots [Formula: see text]3 mm. By comparison, needle litter production was 205 g·m2·year1. Norway spruce roots [Formula: see text]3 mm decomposed at a rate of 9.5% of total root mass per month during the growing season, compared with a needle litter annual decay rate of 22.3%·year1. A partial carbon budget for Norway spruce indicated that annual needle litterfall mass was 98 g C·m2·year1, and annual carbon release from fresh litter decay was approximately 22 g·C·m2·year1. During the growing season, monthly CO2flux from soil respiration was 69 g C·m2·month1, belowground C allocation to net production of roots [Formula: see text]3 mm was 33.5 g C·m2·month1, and C release from decomposition of roots [Formula: see text]3 mm was 31 g C·m2·month1. These values were also extrapolated to annual estimates of C fluxes.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".