Spatial and seasonal variations of leaf area index (LAI) in subtropicalsecondary forests related to floristic composition and stand characters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Leaf area index (LAI) is an important parameter related to carbon, water, and energy exchange between canopy and atmosphere and is widely applied in process models that simulate production and hydrological cycles in forest ecosystems. However, fine-scale spatial heterogeneity of LAI and its controlling factors have yet to be fully understood in Chinese subtropical forests. We used hemispherical photography to measure LAI values in three subtropical forests (Pinus massoniana–Lithocarpus glaber coniferous and evergreen broadleaved mixed forests, Choerospondias axillaris deciduous broadleaved forests, and L. glaber–Cyclobalanopsis glauca evergreen broadleaved forests) from April 2014 to January 2015. Spatial heterogeneity of LAI and its controlling factors were analysed using geostatistical methods and the generalised additive models (GAMs) respectively. Our results showed that LAI values differed greatly in the three forests and their seasonal variations were consistent with plant phenology. LAI values exhibited strong spatial autocorrelation for the three forests measured in January and for the L. glaber–C. glauca forest in April, July, and October. Obvious patch distribution pattern of LAI values occurred in three forests during the non-growing period and this pattern gradually dwindled in the growing season. Stem number, crown coverage, proportion of evergreen conifer species on basal area basis, proportion of deciduous species on basal area basis, and forest types affected the spatial variations in LAI values in January, while stem number and proportion of deciduous species on basal area basis affected the spatial variations in LAI values in July. Floristic composition, spatial heterogeneity, and seasonal variations should be considered for sampling strategy in indirect LAI measurement and application of LAI to simulate functional processes in subtropical forests.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".