MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2114130497 · doi:10.1029/2001jd000861

Soil surface CO<sub>2</sub> flux in a boreal black spruce fire chronosequence

2002· article· en· W2114130497 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chuankuan Wang, Ben Bond‐Lamberty, Stith T. Gower

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChronosequenceBlack spruceTaigaBorealEnvironmental scienceFlux (metallurgy)Soil carbonCarbon cycleSoil waterHydrology (agriculture)EcosystemForestryAtmospheric sciencesSoil scienceEcologyGeologyGeographyChemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding the effects of wildfire on the carbon (C) cycle of boreal forests is essential to quantifying the role of boreal forests in the global carbon cycle. Soil surface CO 2 flux (R s ), the second largest C flux in boreal forests, is directly and indirectly affected by fire and is hypothesized to change during forest succession following fire. The overall objective of this study was to measure and model R s for a black spruce ( Picea mariana [Mill.] BSP) postfire chronosequence in northern Manitoba, Canada. The experiment design was a nested factorial that included two soil drainage classes (well and poorly drained) × seven postfire aged stands. Specific objectives were (1) to quantify the relationship between R s and soil temperature for different aged boreal black spruce forests in well‐drained and poorly drained soil conditions, (2) to examine R s dynamics along postfire successional stands, and (3) to estimate annual soil surface CO 2 flux for these ecosystems. Soil surface CO 2 flux was significantly affected by soil drainage class (p = 0.014) and stand age (p = 0.006). Soil surface CO 2 flux was positively correlated to soil temperature (R 2 = 0.78, p &lt; 0.001), but different models were required for each drainage class × aged stand combination. Soil surface CO 2 flux was significantly greater at the well‐drained than the poorly drained stands (p = 0.007) during growing season. Annual soil surface CO 2 flux for the 1998, 1995, 1989, 1981, 1964, 1930, and 1870 burned stands averaged 226, 412, 357, 413, 350, 274, and 244 g C m ‐2 yr −1 in the well‐drained stands and 146, 380, 300, 303, 256, 233, and 264 g C m −2 yr −1 in the poorly drained stands. Soil surface CO 2 flux during the winter (from 1 November to 30 April) comprised from 5 to 19% of the total annual R s . We speculate that the smaller soil surface CO 2 flux in the recently burned than the older stands is mainly caused by decreased root respiration.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.495
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.004

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.259 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations101
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicFire effects on ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207