Biophysical controls on rhizospheric and heterotrophic components of soil respiration in a boreal black spruce stand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We conducted a root-exclusion experiment in a 125-year-old boreal black spruce (Picea mariana (Mill.) BSP) stand in 2004 to quantify the physical and biological controls on temporal dynamics of the rhizospheric (R(r)) and heterotrophic (R(h)) components of soil respiration (R(s)). Annual R(r), R(h) and estimated moss respiration were 285, 269 and 57 g C m(-2) year(-1), respectively, which accounted for 47, 44 and 9% of R(s) (611 g C m(-2) year(-1)), respectively. A gradual transition from R(h)-dominated (winter, spring and fall) to R(r)-dominated (summer) respiration was observed during the year. Soil thawing in spring and the subsequent increase in soil water content (theta) induced a small and sustained increase in R(h) but had no effect on R(r). During the remainder of the growing season, no effect of theta was observed on either component of R(s). Both components increased exponentially with soil temperature (T(s)) during the growing season, but R(r) showed greater temperature sensitivity than R(h) (Q(10) of 4.0 and 3.0, respectively). Temperature-normalized variations in R(r) were highly correlated with eddy covariance estimates of gross ecosystem photosynthesis, and the correlation was greatest when R(r) was lagged by 24 days. Within diurnal cycles, variations in T(s) were highly coupled to variations in R(h) but were significantly decoupled from R(r). The patterns observed at both time scales strongly suggest that the flow of photosynthates to the rhizosphere is a key driver of belowground respiration processes but that photosynthate supply may control these processes in several ways.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".