MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2158172688 · doi:10.1139/x08-061

Water table depth affects productivity, water use, and the response to nitrogen addition in a savanna system

2008· article· en· W2158172688 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chelcy R. Ford, Robert J. Mitchell, Robert O. Teskey

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of GeorgiaU.S. Environmental Protection Agency
KeywordsPrimary productionDeserts and xeric shrublandsProductivityWater tableEnvironmental scienceNutrientTranspirationAgronomyEcologyPlant communityHydrology (agriculture)EcosystemForestryBiologyBotanyGeographyPhotosynthesisGroundwater

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigated annual aboveground net primary productivity (ANPP) and transpiration (E) of the dominant plant life forms, longleaf pine (Pinus palustris Mill.) trees and wiregrass (Aristida stricta Michx.), in a fire-maintained savanna. Experimental plots spanned a natural hydrologic gradient (xeric and mesic site types) mediated by soil moisture (θ) and water table depth (WTD), and received additions of either 0 or 100 kg N·ha–1·year–1. Low rates of ANPP (1.3–2.2 Mg·ha–1) and annual E (108–380 mm) were observed in these communities. WTD and N addition explained 95% of the variation in community ANPP, whereas site type and WTD explained 83% of variation in community E. Between tree and grass life forms, longleaf pine ANPP was more coupled to WTD than wiregrass. For any given leaf area supported, ANPP of longleaf pine increased linearly with increasing water use and decreasing WTD. The longleaf pine ANPP response to N addition was greater in sites with high water use compared with those with low water use, indicating that this savanna system is colimited by nutrient and water availability and that water table depth plays a role in regulating savanna productivity.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.209 · 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

Citations56
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207