A dynamic organic soil biogeochemical model for simulating the effects of wildfire on soil environmental conditions and carbon dynamics of black spruce forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ecosystem models have not comprehensively considered how interactions among fire disturbance, soil environmental conditions, and biogeochemical processes affect ecosystem dynamics in boreal forest ecosystems. In this study, we implemented a dynamic organic soil structure in the Terrestrial Ecosystem Model (DOS‐TEM) to investigate the effects of fire on soil temperature, moisture, and ecosystem carbon dynamics. DOS‐TEM consists of environmental, ecological, disturbance effects, and dynamic organic soil modules. Changes in organic layer thickness are computed from calculated changes in carbon pools following fire and during stand succession. DOS‐TEM was parameterized based on studies reported in the literature and evaluated independently at sites in interior Alaska. This evaluation reveals that (1) DOS‐TEM is capable of accurately simulating the thickness and carbon content of organic soils; and (2) without the dynamic linkage between soil organic thickness and carbon content, the model overestimates soil carbon in deep mineral soil horizons of dry black spruce ecosystems of interior Alaska. Sensitivity tests were performed to investigate issues related to spatial heterogeneity of carbon dynamics including soil drainage and fire frequency. Results show that both soil drainage and fire frequency are important in the carbon dynamics simulated by DOS‐TEM, and should be considered in spatial applications of the model.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".