Coupling of Phosphorus Processes With Carbon and Nitrogen Cycles in the Dynamic Land Ecosystem Model: Model Structure, Parameterization, and Evaluation in Tropical Forests
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The biogeochemical processes of carbon (C), nitrogen (N), and phosphorous (P) are fully coupled in the Earth system, which shape the structure, functioning, and dynamics of terrestrial ecosystems. However, the representation of P cycle in terrestrial biosphere models (TBMs) is still in an early stage. Here we incorporated P processes and C‐N‐P interactions into the C‐N coupled Dynamic Land Ecosystem Model (DLEM‐CNP), which had a major feature of the ability in simulating the N and P colimitation on vegetation C assimilation. DLEM‐CNP was intensively calibrated and validated against daily or annual observations from four eddy covariance flux sites, two Hawaiian sites along a chronosequence of soils, and other 13 tropical forest sites. The results indicate that DLEM‐CNP significantly improved simulations of forest gross and net primary production (R2: 0.36–0.97, RMSE:1.1–1.49 g C m−2 year−1 for daily GPP at eddy covariance flux sites; R2 = 0.92, RMSE = 176.7 g C m−2 year−1 for annual NPP across 13 tropical forest sites). The simulations were also consistent with field observations in terms of biomass, leaf N:P ratio and plant response to fertilizer addition. A sensitivity analysis suggests that simulated results are reasonably robust against uncertainties in model parameter estimates and the model was very sensitive to parameters of P uptake. These results suggest that incorporating P processes and N‐P interaction into terrestrial biosphere models is of critical importance for accurately estimating C dynamics in tropical forests, particularly those P‐limited ones.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".