MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110191337 · doi:10.1139/x02-098

Variation in overstory nitrogen uptake in a small, high-elevation southern Appalachian spruce-fir watershed

2002· article· en· W2110191337 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M.G. Barker, Helga Van Miegroet, N. S. Nicholas, Irena F. Creed

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Energy Technology LaboratoryTennessee Valley AuthorityU.S. Geological SurveyU.S. Department of AgricultureU.S. Department of Energy
KeywordsThroughfallWatershedForestryEnvironmental scienceBalsamBetula pubescensPlant litterMicrositeBiologyEcologyNutrientAgronomyBotanyGeographyCanopySeedling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High-elevation red spruce (Picea rubens Sarg.) – Fraser fir (Abies fraseri (Pursh) Poir.) forests of the southern Appalachians exhibit considerable spatial heterogeneity in structure, and possibly in N uptake, because of a combination of natural disturbances and heavy fir mortality caused by infestations of the exotic balsam woolly adelgid (Adelges piceae Ratz). The objectives of this study are to determine spatial variability in tree N uptake in a small high-elevation catchment in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park, compare outcomes among calculation methods, and assess the influence of stand and landscape properties on N uptake. Tree N uptake is estimated for fifty 20 × 20 m plots in the Noland Divide Watershed (NDW). Components considered in the calculations are stem growth, foliage increment, and mortality of spruce, fir, and yellow birch (Betula alleghaniensis Britt.) from 1993 and 1998 stand inventories; throughfall N flux measured in summers 1998 and 1999; litterfall N return for 1 year in a subset of 12 plots; tissue N analyses; and atmospheric N deposition and root turnover estimates from the literature. Overstory N uptake varies spatially within NDW, with a CV of 9–41% depending on the calculation method. Variability among methods is even higher, with an almost 15-fold difference between the smallest and largest average overstory uptake estimate (5 vs. 74 kg·ha–1·year–1). Only 5 and 3 kg·ha–1·year–1of N is sequestered in wood and foliar increment, respectively, while 36 kg·ha–1of N returns annually as aboveground litterfall. Uptake and its components are correlated with measures of stand structure but not with elevation or aspect.

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)0.001
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations32
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207