MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2560826749 · doi:10.1002/2016jg003546

Interactions among vegetation, climate, and herbivory control greenhouse gas fluxes in a subarctic coastal wetland

2016· article· en· W2560826749 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katharine C. Kelsey, A. Joshua Leffler, Karen H. Beard, Joel A. Schmutz, Ryan T. Choi, J. M. Welker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Arctic SciencesUtah Agricultural Experiment StationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSubarctic climateEnvironmental scienceHerbivoreGreenhouse gasWetlandClimate changeEcologyVegetation (pathology)EcosystemPopulationPlant communityAtmospheric sciencesEcological successionBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract High‐latitude ecosystems are experiencing the most rapid climate changes globally, and in many areas these changes are concurrent with shifts in patterns of herbivory. Individually, climate and herbivory are known to influence biosphere‐atmosphere greenhouse gas (GHG) exchange; however, the interactive effects of climate and herbivory in driving GHG fluxes have been poorly quantified, especially in coastal systems that support large populations of migratory waterfowl. We investigated the magnitude and the climatic and physical controls of GHG exchange within the Yukon‐Kuskokwim Delta in western Alaska across four distinct vegetation communities formed by herbivory and local microtopography. Net CO 2 flux was greatest in the ungrazed Carex meadow community (3.97 ± 0.58 [SE] µmol CO 2 m −2 s −1 ), but CH 4 flux was greatest in the grazed community (14.00 ± 6.56 nmol CH 4 m −2 s −1 ). The grazed community is also the only vegetation type where CH 4 was a larger contributor than CO 2 to overall GHG forcing. We found that vegetation community was an important predictor of CO 2 and CH 4 exchange, demonstrating that variation in regional gas exchange is best explained when the effect of grazing, determined by the difference between grazed and ungrazed communities, is included. Further, we identified an interaction between temperature and vegetation community, indicating that grazed regions could experience the greatest increases in CH 4 emissions with warming. These results suggest that future GHG fluxes could be influenced by both climate and by changes in herbivore population dynamics that expand or contract the vegetation community most responsive to future temperature change.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.942

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

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

Citations43
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research BiogeosciencesSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207