Modelling live fuel moisture content at leaf and canopy scale under extreme drought using a lumped plant hydraulic model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Water content in living vegetation (or live fuel moisture content, LFMC), is increasingly recognized as a key factor linked to vegetation mortality and wildfire ignition and spread. Most often, empirical indices are used as surrogates for direct LFMC measurements. In this paper, we explore the functional and ecophysiological drivers of LFMC during drought at the leaf and canopy scale using the SurEau-Ecos model, and a three years dataset of leaf and canopy scale measurements on a mature Quercus ilex forest, including an extreme drought. The model is based on forest hydrology and plant hydraulics and allows to simulate temporal variations of water potential and content at a daily time step. At leaf level, it simulates the relationship between water potential and water content by separating the apoplasm and the symplasm. Symplasm water content is modeled using the pressure volume curve theory, and apoplasm water content is modelled using the xylem vulnerability to cavitation. Fuel moisture content was upscaled to the canopy level by accounting for foliage mortality estimated from drought induced cavitation. The model was parameterized either with site-measured traits or using a calibration procedure, and compared with water potential and LFMC measured at leaf level, and NDVI variation measured at canopy level and taken as a surrogate for foliage mortality. At leaf level, LFMC prediction using measured hydraulic traits could be improved by considering year-to-year osmotic adjustments. At canopy level, foliage mortality due to drought induced cavitation was a key driver of LFMC decline during the most extreme drought. A sensitivity analysis showed that parameters driving soil water balance (leaf area index, soil water capacity, and regulation of transpiration) and parameters determining pressure volume curves are key traits driving LFMC dynamics at leaf level. At the canopy level, parameters that drives hydraulic failure were the most sensitive and included, both soil water balance parameters and hydraulic traits (the leaf vulnerability to cavitation) were the main drivers of LFMC decline during extreme drought. We also showed that under normal historic weather conditions, most variation of LFMC are linked to reversible symplasm dehydration, however under future, hotter and dryer conditions, most variations are due to the decline canopy of LFMC driven by foliage mortality.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".