Global variation of transpiration and soil evaporation and the role of their major climate drivers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Although global variation in actual evapotranspiration has been widely investigated, it remains unclear how its two major components, transpiration and soil evaporation, are driven by climate drivers across global land surface. This paper uses a well‐validated, process‐based model that estimates transpiration and soil evaporation, and for the first time investigates and quantifies how the main global drivers, associated to vegetation process and the water and energy cycle, drive the spatiotemporal variation of the two components. The results show that transpiration and soil evaporation dominate the variance of actual evapotranspiration in wet and dry regions, respectively. Dry southern hemisphere from 13°S to 27°S is highlighted since it contributes to 21% global soil evaporation variance, with only 11% global land area. In wet regions, particularly in the humid tropics, there are strong correlations between transpiration, actual evapotranspiration, and potential evapotranspiration, with precipitation playing a relatively minor role, and available radiative energy is the major contributor to the interannual variability in transpiration and actual evapotranspiration in Amazonia. Conversely in dry regions, there are strong correlations between soil evaporation, actual evapotranspiration, and precipitation. Our findings highlight that ecohydrological links are highly related to climate regimes, and the small region such as Australia has important contribution to interannual variation in global soil evaporation and evapotranspiration, and anthropogenic activities strongly influence the variances in irrigation regions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".