MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2146652541 · doi:10.1073/pnas.1413090112

Joint control of terrestrial gross primary productivity by plant phenology and physiology

2015· article· en· W2146652541 on OpenAlexaff
Jianyang Xia, Shuli Niu, Philippe Ciais, Ivan A. Janssens, Jiquan Chen, Christof Ammann, M. Altaf Arain, Peter D. Blanken, Alessandro Cescatti, Damien Bonal, Nina Buchmann, Peter S. Curtis, Shiping Chen, Jinwei Dong, Lawrence B. Flanagan, Christian Frankenberg, Teodoro Georgiadis, Christopher M. Gough, Dafeng Hui, Gerard Kiely, Jianwei Li, Magnus Lund, Vincenzo Magliulo, Barbara Marcolla, Lutz Merbold, Leonardo Montagnani, Eddy Moors, Jørgen E. Olesen, Shilong Piao, A. Raschi, Olivier Roupsard, Andrew E. Suyker, Marek Urbaniak, Francesco Primo Vaccari, Andrej Varlagin, Timo Vesala, Matthew Wilkinson, Ensheng Weng, Georg Wohlfahrt, Liming Yan, Yiqi Luo

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of LethbridgeMcMaster University
FundersNational Science Foundation
KeywordsPhenologyProductivityJoint (building)Primary productivityBiologyPrimary productionControl (management)EcologyEngineeringComputer scienceEcosystemEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Terrestrial gross primary productivity (GPP) varies greatly over time and space. A better understanding of this variability is necessary for more accurate predictions of the future climate-carbon cycle feedback. Recent studies have suggested that variability in GPP is driven by a broad range of biotic and abiotic factors operating mainly through changes in vegetation phenology and physiological processes. However, it is still unclear how plant phenology and physiology can be integrated to explain the spatiotemporal variability of terrestrial GPP. Based on analyses of eddy-covariance and satellite-derived data, we decomposed annual terrestrial GPP into the length of the CO2 uptake period (CUP) and the seasonal maximal capacity of CO2 uptake (GPPmax). The product of CUP and GPPmax explained >90% of the temporal GPP variability in most areas of North America during 2000-2010 and the spatial GPP variation among globally distributed eddy flux tower sites. It also explained GPP response to the European heatwave in 2003 (r(2) = 0.90) and GPP recovery after a fire disturbance in South Dakota (r(2) = 0.88). Additional analysis of the eddy-covariance flux data shows that the interbiome variation in annual GPP is better explained by that in GPPmax than CUP. These findings indicate that terrestrial GPP is jointly controlled by ecosystem-level plant phenology and photosynthetic capacity, and greater understanding of GPPmax and CUP responses to environmental and biological variations will, thus, improve predictions of GPP over time and space.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations434
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the National Academy of SciencesSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207