Spatial Patterns of Soil Respiration Links Above and Belowground Processes along a Boreal Aspen Fire Chronosequence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fire in boreal ecosystems is known to affect CO2 efflux from forest soils, which is commonly termed soil respiration (Rs). However, there is limited information on how fire and recovery from this disturbance affects spatial variation in Rs. The main objective of this study was to quantify the spatial variability of Rs over the growing season in a boreal aspen (Populus tremuloides Michx.) fire chronosequence. The chronosequence included three stands in northern Alberta; a post fire stand (1 year old, PF), a stand at canopy closure (9 years old, CC), and a mature stand (72 years old, MA). Soil respiration, temperature and moisture were measured monthly from May to August using an intensive spatial sampling protocol (n = 42, minimum lag = 2 m). Key aboveground and belowground properties were measured one time at each sampling point. No spatial structure was detected in Rs of the PF stand during the peak growing season (June and July), whereas Rs was auto-correlated at a scale of < 6 m in the CC and MA stands. The PF stand had the lowest mean Rs (4.60 μmol C m-2 s-1) followed by the CC (5.41 μmol C m-2 s-1), and the MA (7.32 μmol C m-2 s-1) stand. Forest floor depth was the only aboveground factor that influenced the spatial pattern of Rs in all three stands and was strongest in the PF stand. Enzyme activity and fine root biomass, on the other hand, were the significant belowground factors driving the spatial pattern of Rs in the CC and MA stands. Persistent joint aboveground and belowground control on Rs in the CC and MA stands indicates a tight spatial coupling, which was not observed in the PF stand. Overall, the current study suggests that fire in the boreal aspen ecosystem alters the spatial structure of Rs and that fine scale heterogeneity develops quickly as stands reach the canopy closure phase (<10 years).
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".