The Potential of Satellite Remote Sensing Time Series to Uncover Wetland Phenology under Unique Challenges of Tidal Setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While growth history of vegetation within upland systems is well studied, plant phenology within coastal tidal systems is less understood. Landscape-scale, satellite-derived indicators of plant greenness may not adequately represent seasonality of vegetation biomass and productivity within tidal wetlands due to limitations of cloud cover, satellite temporal frequency, and attenuation of plant signals by tidal flooding. However, understanding plant phenology is necessary to gain insight into aboveground biomass, photosynthetic activity, and carbon sequestration. In this study, we use a modeling approach to estimate plant greenness throughout a year in tidal wetlands located within the San Francisco Bay Area, USA. We used variables such as EVI history, temperature, and elevation to predict plant greenness on a 14-day timestep. We found this approach accurately estimated plant greenness, with larger error observed within more dynamic restored wetlands, particularly at early post-restoration stages. We also found modeled EVI can be used as an input variable into greenhouse gas models, allowing for an estimate of carbon sequestration and gross primary production. Our strategy can be further developed in future research by assessing restoration and management effects on wetland phenological dynamics and through incorporating the entire Sentinel-2 time series once it becomes available within Google Earth Engine.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".