Hydrologic fluxes in the Volta River watershed : A paleo-terrestrial environment in West Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The hydrologic cycle plays an important role in carbon cycling, due to the coupling of vapour release and CO2 uptake during photosynthesis. This coupling, expressed as water use efficiency of transpiration ratio, can provide an inexpensive alternative for estimating the Net Primary Productivity (NPP) of terrestrial ecosystem. Stable isotopes of hydrogen and oxygen and long-term hydrologic and meteorological data together with stoichiometric relations of water and carbon are used to constrain water and carbon balances for the Volta River watershed. Soils annually respire 0.199 Pg C, and the balance of these fluxes or Net Ecosystem Productivity (NEP) is +0.029 Pg C Yr-1, implying an annual flux of CO2 to the atmosphere. Annually, the Volta river watershed receives about 380 km3 of rainfall. Approximately 50% of this volume of water is returned to the atmosphere through plant transpiration. Associated with annual transpiration flux is a carbon flux of 0.170 × 1015 g C yr-1 or 428 g C m-2 yr-1 from the terrestrial ecosystem. Modeled estimates of heterotrophic soil respiration exceed slightly the NPP estimate, implying that carbon flux to and from the Volta river watershed is close to being in balance or the watershed is a small annual source of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere. In addition to terrestrial carbon flux, the balance of photosynthesis and respiration in Volta Lake is also examined. The lake was found to release carbon dioxide to the atmosphere, although the magnitude of the flux is smaller than that of the terrestrial ecosystem. Key words: Hydrologic cycle, carbon cycling, Volta river basin, isotope mass balance relation, carbon sink
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".