MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3155594919 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/abf6f3

Tropical dry forest resilience and water use efficiency: an analysis of productivity under climate change

2021· article· en· W3155594919 on OpenAlexafffund
Kayla Stan, Arturo Sánchez‐Azofeifa, Sandra M. Durán, J. Antonio Guzmán Q., Michael Hesketh, Kati Laakso, Carlos Portillo‐Quintero, Cassidy Rankine, Sebastian Döetterl

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaInter-American Institute for Global Change ResearchUniversity of AlbertaAlberta InnovatesAlberta Innovates - Technology Futures
KeywordsClimate changeEnvironmental sciencePhenologyTropical and subtropical dry broadleaf forestsProductivityPrecipitationNorthern HemisphereTropicsProxy (statistics)ClimatologyGlobal changePhysical geographyAgroforestryGeographyEcologyBiologyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Tropical dry forests (TDFs) worldwide have an environment-sensitive phenological signal, which easily marks their response to the changing climatic conditions, especially precipitation and temperature. Using TDF phenological characteristics as a proxy, this study aims to evaluate their current continental response to climate change across the Americas. Here, we show that TDFs are resilient to water stress and droughts by increasing their rain use efficiency (RUE) in drier years and recovering to average RUE in the year following the drought. Additionally, we find that TDF productivity trends over the past 18 years are spatially clustered, with sites in the northern hemisphere experiencing increased productivity, while equatorial regions have no change, and the southern hemisphere exhibiting decreased productivity. The results indicate that the TDF will be resilient under future climatic conditions, particularly if there are increasing drought conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.187
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon DynamicsFrench-language works237,207