Deficit and Recovery of Deep Soil Water Following a Full Cycle of Afforestation and Deforestation of Apple Trees on the Loess Plateau, China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Land-use change could substantially alter the soil water balance and hydrological cycles; however, little is known on the changes in deep soil water following a cycle of afforestation and deforestation. The purpose of this study was to quantify the soil water deficit in an apple orchard and subsequent replenishment of deep soil water after the orchard was felled. Soil water changes were quantified using the “space-for-time” method through a paired plot design. The results showed that the water storage in deep soil (>3 m in depth) began to decrease when the apple tree reached about 10 years of age. The cumulative deficit of deep soil water storage in the 3–18 m soil depth could reach about 1200 mm; however, deep soil water was so depleted that apple trees can no longer adsorb water from the deep soil when apple trees are older (>22 years old). After the apple orchard was converted to cropland, precipitation replenished the desiccated deep soil to a depth of about 7 m in the first two years, but thereafter, both water recovery amount and the advance rate of the wetting front were slowed down. After 15–16 years of recovery, soil water storage increased by 512–646 mm, accounting for 42.7–53.8% of the total cumulative soil water deficit caused by the apple orchard. However, it will take more than 26 years for soil water to be replenished to the level of the original cropland prior to planting apple trees. The considerable water deficit after afforestation and subsequent long water recovery time following deforestation extend our understanding of the effect of deep-rooted trees on water balance at the decade scale.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".