MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3089380221 · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-72614-2

Modelling the effects of CO2 on C3 and C4 grass competition during the mid-Pleistocene transition in South Africa

2020· article· en· W3089380221 on OpenAlexaff
Michaela Ecker, Douglas I. Kelley, Hiromitsu Sato

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersMarie CurieNatural Environment Research CouncilEuropean CommissionSight Research UK
KeywordsPleistoceneGlacial periodVegetation (pathology)Physical geographyLast Glacial MaximumClimate changeEcologyPaleoclimatologyProxy (statistics)Environmental scienceCompetition (biology)GrasslandSeasonalityGeologyClimatologyGeographyPaleontologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Palaeoenvironmental reconstructions of the interior of South Africa show a wetter environment than today and a non-analogous vegetation structure in the Early Pleistocene. This includes the presence of grasses following both C3 and C4 photosynthetic pathways, whereas C3 grasses decline after the mid-Pleistocene transition (MPT, c. 1.2–0.8 Ma). However, the local terrestrial proxy record cannot distinguish between the potential drivers of these vegetation changes. In this study we show that low glacial CO2 levels, similar to those at the MPT, lead to the local decline of C3 grasses under conditions of decreased water availability, using a vegetation model (LPX) driven by Atmosphere–Ocean coupled General Climate Model climate reconstructions. We modelled vegetation for glacial climates under different levels of CO2 and fire regimes and find evidence that a combination of low CO2 and changed seasonality is driving the changes in grass cover, whereas fire has little influence on the ratio of C3:C4 grasses. Our results suggest the prevalence of a less vegetated landscape with limited, seasonal water availability, which could potentially explain the much sparser mid-Pleistocene archaeological record in the southern Kalahari.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.132
Threshold uncertainty score0.263

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.207
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations14
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research→French-language works237,207→