MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2098730071 · doi:10.1657/1938-4246-44.4.446

Cold Season Respiration Across a Low Arctic Landscape: the Influence of Vegetation Type, Snow Depth, and Interannual Climatic Variation

2012· article· en· W2098730071 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Paul Grogan

Bibliographic record

VenueArctic Antarctic and Alpine Research · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceSnowVegetation (pathology)ArcticUnderstoryGrowing seasonEcosystemCarbon cycleAtmospheric sciencesEcosystem respirationArctic vegetationEcologyClimatologyPhysical geographyPrimary productionGeographyTundraGeologyBiologyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cold season respiration may significantly affect arctic terrestrial ecosystem annual net carbon balances. Here, the influences of vegetation type, experimentally deepened snow, and interannual climatic variation on total cold season CO2 efflux were investigated in a Canadian low arctic site containing dry heath, tall birch understory, birch hummock, and wet sedge ecosystems.Total efflux ranged from 34 to 126 g CO2-C m-2 among the vegetation types, with the tall birch understory respiring at least twice that of the birch hummock and four times that of either the dry heath or wet sedge. This variation did not correlate with soil temperature differences alone, but instead was attributed to ecosystem-specific interactions between snow depth, vegetation canopy cover, soil temperature, and moisture, as well as differences in plant biomass and litter production. Respiration from the birch hummock site was twice as high in 2006/2007 (the year of relatively warm fall and late winter soil temperature phases) as compared to 2004/2005, and was enhanced by the snow fence treatment only in the latter year. Together, these data demonstrate that cold season CO2 release differs substantially among tundra vegetation types, and strongly suggest that these effluxes can significantly offset growing season carbon gains, resulting in annual net carbon losses in some years.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.479
Threshold uncertainty score0.953

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.279 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArctic Antarctic and Alpine ResearchSame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207