Determinants of soil respiration in a semi-arid savanna ecosystem, Kruger National Park, South Africa : original research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil respiration, which is a combination of root respiration and microbial respiration, represents one of the main carbon fluxes in savannas. However, it is remarkable how little is known about these components - regarding either process-level mechanisms or quantitative estimates, especially in savanna ecosystems. Given the extensive area of savannas worldwide, this limits our ability to understand and predict the critical changes in the global carbon budget that underlie the phenomenon of global climate change. From May 2000 to April 2001, bi-weekly soil respiration measurements from two savanna types were made in 14 sampling collars (diameter = 100 mm), using a PP Systems EGM-2 respirometer. Results indicated that there was a difference in the rate of respiration between the more clayey Acacia and sandier Combretum savanna soils (p = 0.028). The mean (± s.d.) soil respiration in the Acacia savanna was 0.540 g/m2/h ± 0.419 g/m2/h, whilst it was 0.484 g/m2/h ± 0.383 g/m2/h in the Combretum savanna. We also found that soil respiration was sensitive to soil moisture and soil temperature. The rate of soil respiration at both sites rose to a maximum when soil temperature was at 28 °C and declined at higher temperatures, despite different temperature sensitivities. Soil respiration increased approximately linearly with an increase of soil moisture. In both savanna sites soil is subject to a combination of high temperature and water stress, which controls the fluxes of soil carbon dioxide. We found that the two sites differed significantly in their soil moisture characteristics (p < 0.0001) but not with regard to temperature (p = 0.141), which implies that soil moisture is the main factor responsible for the differences in respiration between Acacia and Combretum savannas. Conservation implications: It is argued for many protected areas that they perform a climate change buffering function. Knowing the soil respiration rate and determining its controlling factors contribute to improved understanding of whether protected areas will be net sources or sinks of carbon in the future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".