MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964448647 · doi:10.1111/ele.13346

Spatial and temporal variation of ecosystem properties at macroscales

2019· letter· en· W2964448647 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia A. Soranno, Tyler Wagner, Sarah M. Collins, Jean‐François Lapierre, Noah R. Lottig, Samantha K. Oliver

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology Letters · 2019
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
FundersNational Institute of Food and AgricultureNational Science Foundation
KeywordsSpatial variabilityVariation (astronomy)Regional variationEcosystemSpatial heterogeneityTemporal scalesSpatial ecologyEcologyEnvironmental scienceStatisticsBiologyMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although spatial and temporal variation in ecological properties has been well-studied, crucial knowledge gaps remain for studies conducted at macroscales and for ecosystem properties related to material and energy. We test four propositions of spatial and temporal variation in ecosystem properties within a macroscale (1000 km's) extent. We fit Bayesian hierarchical models to thousands of observations from over two decades to quantify four components of variation - spatial (local and regional) and temporal (local and coherent); and to model their drivers. We found strong support for three propositions: (1) spatial variation at local and regional scales are large and roughly equal, (2) annual temporal variation is mostly local rather than coherent, and, (3) spatial variation exceeds temporal variation. Our findings imply that predicting ecosystem responses to environmental changes at macroscales requires consideration of the dominant spatial signals at both local and regional scales that may overwhelm temporal signals.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.179 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations51
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcology LettersSame topicEcology and Vegetation Dynamics StudiesFrench-language works237,207