MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2402331603 · doi:10.5194/hess-21-311-2017

Environmental controls on seasonal ecosystem evapotranspiration/potential evapotranspiration ratio as determined by the global eddy flux measurements

2017· article· en· W2402331603 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Chunwei Liu, Ge Sun, Steven G. McNulty, Asko Noormets, Yuan Fang

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrology and earth system sciences · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersLawrence Berkeley National LaboratoryU.S. Forest ServiceNanjing UniversityNatural Resources CanadaNanjing University of Information Science and TechnologyChina Scholarship CouncilUniversité LavalOak Ridge National LaboratorySouthern Research StationBiological and Environmental ResearchNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric SciencesMicrosoft ResearchNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Department of AgricultureU.S. Department of EnergyNational Science Foundation
KeywordsEvapotranspirationEddy covarianceEnvironmental scienceFlux (metallurgy)EcosystemAtmospheric sciencesHydrology (agriculture)EcologyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. The evapotranspiration / potential evapotranspiration (AET / PET) ratio is traditionally termed as the crop coefficient (Kc) and has been generally used as ecosystem evaporative stress index. In the current hydrology literature, Kc has been widely used as a parameter to estimate crop water demand by water managers but has not been well examined for other types of ecosystems such as forests and other perennial vegetation. Understanding the seasonal dynamics of this variable for all ecosystems is important for projecting the ecohydrological responses to climate change and accurately quantifying water use at watershed to global scales. This study aimed at deriving monthly Kc for multiple vegetation cover types and understanding its environmental controls by analyzing the accumulated global eddy flux (FLUXNET) data. We examined monthly Kc data for seven vegetation covers, including open shrubland (OS), cropland (CRO), grassland (GRA), deciduous broad leaf forest (DBF), evergreen needle leaf forest (ENF), evergreen broad leaf forest (EBF), and mixed forest (MF), across 81 sites. We found that, except for evergreen forests (EBF and ENF), Kc values had large seasonal variation across all land covers. The spatial variability of Kc was well explained by latitude, suggesting site factors are a major control on Kc. Seasonally, Kc increased significantly with precipitation in the summer months, except in EBF. Moreover, leaf area index (LAI) significantly influenced monthly Kc in all land covers, except in EBF. During the peak growing season, forests had the highest Kc values, while croplands (CRO) had the lowest. We developed a series of multivariate linear monthly regression models for Kc by land cover type and season using LAI, site latitude, and monthly precipitation as independent variables. The Kc models are useful for understanding water stress in different ecosystems under climate change and variability as well as for estimating seasonal ET for large areas with mixed land covers.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.624
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
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 head0.218
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations78
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrology and earth system sciencesSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207