MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138895582 · doi:10.5194/acp-14-2939-2014

Observations of reactive nitrogen oxide fluxes by eddy covariance above two midlatitude North American mixed hardwood forests

2014· article· en· W2138895582 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Jeffrey A. Geddes, J. G. Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueAtmospheric chemistry and physics · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosols
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsNOxReactive nitrogenEddy covarianceAtmospheric sciencesFlux (metallurgy)Deposition (geology)Nitrogen oxideMixing ratioNitrogenEnvironmental scienceAtmosphere (unit)HardwoodNitrogen dioxideTrace gasOzoneCanopyEnvironmental chemistryChemistryCombustionMeteorologyEcosystemEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Significant knowledge gaps persist in the understanding of forest–atmosphere exchange of reactive nitrogen oxides, partly due to a lack of direct observations. Chemical transport models require representations of dry deposition over a variety of land surface types, and the role of canopy exchange of NOx (= NO + NO2) is highly uncertain. Biosphere–atmosphere exchange of NOx and NOy (= NOx + HNO3 + PANs + RONO2 + pNO3− + ...) was measured by eddy covariance above a mixed hardwood forest in central Ontario (Haliburton Forest and Wildlife Reserve, or HFWR), and a mixed hardwood forest in northern lower Michigan (Program for Research on Oxidants: Photochemistry, Emissions and Transport, or PROPHET) during the summers of 2011 and 2012 respectively. NOx and NOy mixing ratios were measured by a custom-built two-channel analyser based on chemiluminescence, with selective NO2 conversion via LED photolysis and NOy conversion via a hot molybdenum converter. Consideration of interferences from water vapour and O3, and random uncertainty of the calculated fluxes are discussed. NOy flux observations were predominantly of deposition at both locations. In general, the magnitude of deposition scaled with NOy mixing ratios. Average midday (12:00–16:00) deposition velocities at HFWR and PROPHET were 0.20 ± 0.25 and 0.67 ± 1.24 cm s−1 respectively. Average nighttime (00:00–04:00) deposition velocities were 0.09 ± 0.25 cm s−1 and 0.08 ± 0.16 cm s−1 respectively. At HFWR, a period of highly polluted conditions (NOy concentrations up to 18 ppb) showed distinctly different flux characteristics than the rest of the campaign. Integrated daily average NOy flux was −0.14 mg (N) m−2 day−1 and −0.34 mg (N) m−2 day−1 (net deposition) at HFWR and PROPHET respectively. Concurrent wet deposition measurements were used to estimate the contributions of dry deposition to total reactive nitrogen oxide inputs, found to be 22 and 40% at HFWR and PROPHET respectively.

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)0.000
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 score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.193 · 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

Citations49
Published2014
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAtmospheric chemistry and physicsSame topicAtmospheric chemistry and aerosolsFrench-language works237,207