Modelling carbon balances of coastal arctic tundra under changing climate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rising air temperatures are believed to be hastening heterotrophic respiration (Rh) in arctic tundra ecosystems, which could lead to substantial losses of soil carbon (C). In order to improve confidence in predicting the likelihood of such loss, the comprehensive ecosystem model ecosys was first tested with carbon dioxide (CO2) fluxes measured over a tundra soil in a growth chamber under various temperatures and soil‐water contents (θ). The model was then tested with CO2 and energy fluxes measured over a coastal arctic tundra near Barrow, Alaska, under a range of weather conditions during 1998–1999. A rise in growth chamber temperature from 7 to 15 °C caused large, but commensurate, rises in respiration and CO2 fixation, and so no significant effect on net CO2 exchange was modelled or measured. An increase in growth chamber θ from field capacity to saturation caused substantial reductions in respiration but not in CO2 fixation, and so an increase in net CO2 exchange was modelled and measured. Long daylengths over the coastal tundra at Barrow caused an almost continuous C sink to be modelled and measured during most of July (2–4 g C m−2 d−1), but shortening daylengths and declining air temperatures caused a C source to be modelled and measured by early September (∼1 g C m−2 d−1). At an annual time scale, the coastal tundra was modelled to be a small C sink (4 g C m−2 y−1) during 1998 when average air temperatures were 4 °C above normal, and a larger C sink (16 g C m−2 y−1) during 1999 when air temperatures were close to long‐term normals. During 100 years under rising atmospheric CO2 concentration (Ca), air temperature and precipitation driven by the IS92a emissions scenario, modelled Rh rose commensurately with net primary productivity (NPP) under both current and elevated rates of atmospheric nitrogen (N) deposition, so that changes in soil C remained small. However, methane (CH4) emissions were predicted to rise substantially in coastal tundra with IS92a‐driven climate change (from ∼20 to ∼40 g C m−2 y−1), causing a substantial increase in the emission of CO2 equivalents. If the rate of temperature increase hypothesized in the IS92a emissions scenario had been raised by 50%, substantial losses of soil C (∼1 kg C m−2) would have been modelled after 100 years, including additional emissions of CH4.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".