MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110284451 · doi:10.1139/x03-090

Soil respiration responses to temperature are controlled more by roots than by decomposition in balsam fir ecosystems

2003· article· en· W2110284451 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
M. B. Lavigne, Robert D. Boutin, R. J. Foster, G. Goodine, Pierre Y. Bernier, Gilles Robitaille

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAbies balsameaBalsamSoil respirationEnvironmental scienceRespirationEcosystemDecomposerAtmospheric sciencesEcologyAnimal scienceForestryBotanyBiologyGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Concern exists that soil respiration (Rs) will increase with global warming, thereby reducing the sink strength of forest ecosystems for carbon (C) or making them sources. We measured Rs at three balsam fir (Abies balsamea (L.) Mill.) sites on a climatic gradient from 1997 to 2000 to assess potential responses to global warming. Mean annual Rs varied from 0.67 kg C·m-2·year-1 at the cool site, to 1.19 kg C·m-2·year-1 at the midtransect site, to 1.52 kg C·m-2·year-1 at the warm site. Trenched plots were installed in 1999 to partition Rs into root respiration (Rr) and heterotrophic respiration (Rh). Differences in trenched-plot respiration (Rt) among sites were much less than differences in Rs, because trenching reduced Rs at the warm site more than at the cool site. Annual Rt was 22% less than annual Rs at the cool site, 36% less at the midtransect site, and 50% less at the warm site. After making adjustments for extraordinary decomposition of killed roots in trenched plots, it was estimated that annual Rh varied little among sites (0.40 kg C·m-2·year-1 at the cool site to 0.54 kg C·m-2·year-1 at the warm site), but annual Rr varied substantially among sites (0.24 kg C·m-2·year-1 at the cool site to 0.98 kg C·m-2·year-1 at the warm site). We conclude that Rs varied among sites, because climatically driven differences in primary productivity caused greater Rr and greater detrital production for Rh.

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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.268 · 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

Citations124
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207