MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2139355069 · doi:10.1139/x01-187

The growing season carbon balance of a sub-boreal clearcut 5 years after harvesting using two independent approaches to measure ecosystem CO<sub>2</sub> flux

2002· article· en· W2139355069 on OpenAlexfundvenueno aff
Thomas G. Pypker, Arthur L. Fredeen

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of British ColumbiaUniversity of Northern British Columbia
KeywordsDeciduousSink (geography)Growing seasonEcosystem respirationEnvironmental scienceCarbon sinkPhotosynthesisAtmospheric sciencesTaigaEcosystemFlux (metallurgy)EcologyCarbon cycleBotanyEddy covarianceChemistryBiologyGeographyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From 27 June to 3 September 1999, CO2 fluxes from a 5-year-old, 84.15-ha vegetated clearcut in sub-boreal British Columbia were measured using a Bowen ratio energy balance (BREB) system and a second approach (the component model) that was based on scaled up CO2-flux measurements from belowground and plants (spruce seedlings and representative deciduous species). Over the 69-day study period both methods estimated the site to be a small sink for CO2 (–22.4 and –85 g C·m–2, respectively). Differences between the sink size of the two approaches largely resulted from a divergence in the data after 7 August when the BREB data indicated a switch from sink to source approximately 14 days in advance of the same change from sink to source seen in the component model data. The main components of the CO2 flux within the clearcut were belowground respiration (338 g C·m–2) and deciduous plant photosynthesis (–375 g C·m–2). The conifer seedlings were only a minor component in overall CO2 flux over the growing season (–48 g C·m–2). The small overall sink estimated for the site for the approximately 2.5-month growing period would likely have been surmounted by the belowground respiration if the yearly CO2 fluxes had been taken into account. For example, an additional 68 g C·m–2 was added to the atmosphere from 3 to 23 September (based on belowground respiration data only), after deciduous plants senesced. This source alone was enough to push the site from a sink to a source for CO2.

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 score0.607
Threshold uncertainty score0.782

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations22
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207