MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2284985923 · doi:10.14288/1.0100335

Analysis of the net ecosystem exchange of CO₂ in a 56-year-old coastal Douglas-fir stand : its relation to temperature, soil moisture and photosynthetically active radiation

2011· article· en· W2284985923 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tiebo Cai

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhotosynthetically active radiationEnvironmental scienceEcosystemDouglas firVegetation (pathology)MoistureRelation (database)Atmospheric sciencesClimatologyOceanographyMeteorologyGeologyGeographyForestryEcologyPhotosynthesisBotanyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The primary goal of this thesis was to investigate the relationship of canopy photosynthesis (P) to photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) in a 56-year-old coastal Douglas-fir stand (DF49) located on Vancouver Island. Canopy P was calculated as daytime NEP + daytime R[sub e], where NEP and R[sub e] are net ecosystem production of CO[sub 2] and ecosystem respiration, respectively. Half-hourly values of NEP were obtained using an EC (eddy covariance) system consisting of a 3-D sonic anemometer-thermometer and a closed-path infrared gas (CO[sub 2]/H[sub2]O) analyzer, and daytime R[sub e] was inferred by obtaining the intercept of the relationship between half-hourly values of NEP and PAR. Daytime R[sub e] thus obtained was approximately 71-75% of that calculated by applying the logarithmically-transformed relationship between nighttime NEE (-NEP) and soil temperature (T[sub s]) to daytime half hours. Values of R[sub 10] (the rate of R[sub e] at T[sub s] = 10 °C), obtained from both annual nighttime and daytime R[sub e] – T[sub s] relationships, increased linearly with increasing soil moisture when averaged over the active growing season (April 1 - Sept 30). However, the effect of soil moisture on R[sub e] shown on the multi-year scale could not be detected on the seasonal or annual scale probably as a result of the confounding effects of other environmental factors on R[sub e]. The effective PAR (Q[sub e]) contributing to canopy P in this Douglas-fir canopy was well described as Q[sub d0] + kQ[sub b0], with Q[sub d0] and Q[sub b0] being sky diffuse and direct PAR, respectively. The parameter k, which accounts for the total scattering of Q[sub b0] and the non-scattering effect (e.g., penumbral light spreading) of the solar rays, was found to be approximately 0.22 for this stand. While the Michaelis-Menten equation (the MM model) (i.e., P = αQ[sub t0])A[sub max]/(αQ[sub t0]+A[sub max]), where Q[sub t0] = Q[sub d0] + Q[sub b0]) results in significant overestimation of P in sunny conditions and significant underestimation of P in cloudy conditions, its modification into P = αQ[sub e])A[sub max]/(αQ[sub e]+A[sub max]) (the Q[sub e]-MM model) eliminated these systematic errors. When k = 1, the Q[sub e]-MM model reduces to the MM model. The Q[sub e] - MM model is a single big-leaf model, but it avoids the type of errors made in earlier generations of single big leaf models of canopy P, i.e., using APAR (the total absorbed PAR by the canopy) to calculate P. The simplicity of the Q[sub e]-MM model makes it convenient to be incorporated into large-scale carbon climate models. This study also shows that the widely used sun/shade model developed by de Pury and Farquhar (1997) is inadequate, mainly because the sun/shade model fails to account for the incidence angle between the solar beam and individual sunlit leaves. As with the P modeled using the MM model, the modeled P obtained using the sun/shade model has significant systematic errors with respect to Q[sub d0]/Q[sub t0] (the ratio of Q[sub d0] to Q[sub t0]). In contrast, using the Q[sub e]-MM model to estimate canopy P for this Douglas-fir stand eliminated these systematic errors with respect to Q[sub d0]/Q[sub t0]. In addition, the Q[sub e] -MM model developed in this study agrees with the detailed multilayer model of canopy P developed by Norman and Arkebauer (1991) for agricultural crops (i.e., soybean and corn).

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.154 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207