MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3155155887 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu21-15784

New plant hydraulic architecture reproduces impacts of droughts in the Amazon rainforest

2021· article· en· W3155155887 on OpenAlexaff
Phillip Papastefanou, Christian Zang, Thomas A. M. Pugh, Daijun Liu, David M. Lapola, Katrin Fleischer, Thorsten E. E. Grams, Thomas Hickler, Anja Rammig

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmazon rainforestRainforestEnvironmental scienceEcosystemEcologyHydrology (agriculture)AgroforestryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Amazon rainforest has been hit by extreme drought events in recent decades. Thereby, plant hydraulics are essential to better understand the impacts of droughts on single plants and whole forest ecosystems. Plant hydraulic mechanisms such as stomatal closure and leaf water potential are very complex, still posing challenges for current vegetation model development and parameterization. Here, we present the new hydraulic architecture of the Dynamic Global Vegetation Model LPJ-GUESS, accounting for leaf stomatal responses to plant water status and subsequent drought-induced mortality. We show that when applying the model to the Amazon rainforest we can reproduce the observed increasing trend in carbon losses and the decreasing trend in net carbon sink from plot observations over the past two decades. Our model simulations suggest that the increasing historical trend in carbon losses from mortality can be explained by hydraulic failure and associated mortality. The high biodiversity of the Amazon tropical rainforest poses further challenges for process-based models. Here we present an approach to include the diversity of plant responses to drought by simulating 37 individual Plant Functional Types (PFTs) differing in their leaf water potential regulation- and resistance to soil water stress, and provide a simple solution how to cover a wide range of species and species-specific parameters. Future modelling studies should also take species interaction and competition of different hydraulic strategies into account.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics→French-language works237,207→