Phenology and its role in carbon dioxide exchange processes in northern peatlands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Ecosystem phenology plays an important role in carbon exchange processes and can be derived from continuous records of carbon dioxide (CO2) exchange data. In this study we examined the potential use of phenological indices for characterizing cumulative annual CO2 exchange in four contrasting northern peatland ecosystems. We used the approach of Jonsson and Eklundh (2004) to derive a set of phenological indices based on the daily time series of gross primary production (GPP), ecosystem respiration (Re), and net ecosystem production (NEP) measured in the four peatland sites. The main objectives of this study were (a) to examine the variation in phenological indices across sites and (b) to determine the relationships among phenological indices, environmental conditions, and cumulative annual CO2 exchange. The phenological index used to define the “start of the growing season” showed good potential for differentiation among sites based on their average annual site GPP. Sites with earlier growing seasons had the highest average annual site GPP. The “peak CO2 exchange rate” phenological index performed best in reflecting variations among sites and for estimating annual values of GPP, Re, and NEP (Pearson correlation coefficients ranged between 0.77 and 0.99, p < 0.05 for all.). The phenological indices and annual GPP, Re, and NEP were sensitive to winter (January–March) and summer (July–September) temperature and precipitation, but correlations, though significant, were weak.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".