MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2890090460 · doi:10.5539/enrr.v8n3p102

Does the Date of Burning Affect Carbon and Nutrient Losses in a Humid Savanna of West Africa?

2018· article· en· W2890090460 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Aya B. N Dri, Louis N. Konan

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Natural Resources Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersInstitut de Recherche pour le Développement
KeywordsNutrientBiomass (ecology)Environmental scienceBiomass burningSoil waterCarbon fibersAnimal scienceAtmosphere (unit)AgronomyEnvironmental chemistryChemistryEcologyBiologySoil scienceGeographyAerosolMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A significant impact of fires is the transfer to the atmosphere of the elements contained in combusted biomass. This study was carried out in the Guinean savanna of Lamto (Côte d’Ivoire) to evaluate fire-mediated carbon and nutrient losses from biomass according to the date of burning. The fire regimes tested consisted of three different burning dates: early (EF), mid (MF), and late (LF) season fires, on nine 0.5 ha plots. Carbon and five elemental nutrients were assessed in the aboveground biomass prior to burning and in ash and unburnt biomass after fires; losses were assessed by subtraction. The proportion of nutrients transferred to the atmosphere varied from 42 % (K) to 98 % (C). The lowest losses were recorded during the EF and the greatest during the MF and LF. Emission of CO2 was relatively greatest during the EF than during the MF and LF (16, 14 and 13 t ha-1 respectively). The proportion of the fine ash fraction (< 1 mm) was the greatest during MF. The highest concentrations of K, P, Ca and Mg occurred in this fraction, most susceptible to losses due to wind and rainfall. The percentage losses of C, N and K were positively correlated with fire maximal temperatureand flame height, explaining the relatively higher losses during MF. Over the long term, the MF applied annually, would lead to important depletion of soil nutrients, particularly N and P, which contributes to the low availability of nutrients in the soils of Lamto savannas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Natural Resources Research→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→