MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2992279818 · doi:10.1029/2018ms001541

Representing Grasslands Using Dynamic Prognostic Phenology Based on Biological Growth Stages: Part 2. Carbon Cycling

2019· article· en· W2992279818 on OpenAlex
Katherine Haynes, Ian Baker, Scott Denning, Sebastian Wolf, Georg Wohlfahrt, Gerard Kiely, Renee C. Minaya, John M. Haynes

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Advances in Modeling Earth Systems · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAustralian Research CouncilDivision of Polar ProgramsNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaOffice of ScienceLunds UniversitetEidgenössische Technische Hochschule ZürichU.S. Department of EnergyEuropean CommissionOak Ridge National LaboratoryBiological and Environmental ResearchCanadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric SciencesSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungAustralian GovernmentNatural Resources CanadaNational Aeronautics and Space AdministrationOffice of Polar ProgramsBIOCAP CanadaNational Science Foundation
KeywordsLeaf area indexEnvironmental scienceGrasslandPrimary productionPhenologyGrowing seasonPrecipitationModerate-resolution imaging spectroradiometerCarbon cycleAtmospheric sciencesBiosphere modelEcosystem respirationVegetation (pathology)EcosystemBiosphereAgronomyEcologyGeographyBiologyMeteorologySatellite

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Grasslands are one of the most widely distributed and abundant vegetation types globally, and land surface models struggle to accurately simulate grassland carbon dioxide, energy, and water fluxes. Here we hypothesize that this is due to land surface models having difficulties in reproducing grassland phenology, in particular in response to the seasonal and interannual variability of precipitation. Using leaf area index (LAI), net primary productivity, and flux data at 55 sites spanning climate zones, the aim of this study is to evaluate a novel prognostic phenology model (Simple Biosphere Model, SiB4) while simultaneously illustrating grassland relationships across precipitation gradients. Evaluating from 2000 to 2014, SiB4 predicts daily LAI, carbon, and energy fluxes with root‐mean‐square errors < 15% and individual biases <10%; however, not including management likely reduces its performance. Grassland mean annual LAI increases linearly with mean annual precipitation, with both SiB4 and the Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS) showing a 0.13 increase in LAI per 100‐mm increase in precipitation. Both gross primary production and ecosystem respiration increase with growing season length by ∼8.5 g C m −2 per day, with SiB4 and Fluxnet estimates within 18%. Despite differences in mean annual precipitation and growing season length, all grassland sites shift to seasonal carbon sinks one month prior to peak uptake. During a U.S. drought, MODIS and SiB4 had nearly identical LAI responses, and the LAI change due to drought was less than the LAI change across the precipitation gradient, indicating that grassland drought response is not as strong as the overlying climate response.

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.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score0.459

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.250
Teacher spread0.233 · 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