Experimental test of water, nutrients, and microclimate on leaf litter mass loss in headwater riparian forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Leaf litter decomposition is an essential function in forest ecosystems, and riparian areas may contribute to faster rates of litter mass loss due to higher moisture and nutrient levels in riparian than upland soils. We experimentally tested whether mass loss of red alder leaf litter was (1) greater closer to the stream than further away and (2) increased by nutrient and water additions in riparian habitat near four headwater streams in southwestern British Columbia. We set up blocks of nine transects extending from the bankfull edge of the stream into upland habitat. Leaf litter bags were placed at 1, 5, 10, 20, and 40 m from the stream along each transect, and data loggers recorded ambient air temperature and relative humidity at each distance. Litterbags received either water or fertilizer additions, both, or neither along each transect. Four trials were run which varied in duration (3 months to 1 yr). Relative humidity was on average 2.6% higher, air temperature 0.25°C lower, and vapor pressure deficit 0.14 kPa lower at 1 m from the stream compared to distances further upland. The addition of water significantly increased litter mass loss by 0.14 g (4%) on average than control litterbags. The addition of fertilizer was a significant factor in some trials but not in others, and its effect on mass loss varied. Although distance from the stream was not a significant parameter in the averaged models for each trial, it was in several top models. We conclude that (1) riparian communities within 1 m of the stream experience a different microclimate during the warmer, drier summer than those communities further upland, though this was not generally reflected in alder mass loss rates, and (2) water was a primary limiting factor to alder leaf mass loss in our study sites.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".