Reduced ecosystem resilience quantifies fine‐scale heterogeneity in tropical forest mortality responses to drought
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Sensitivity of forest mortality to drought in carbon‐dense tropical forests remains fraught with uncertainty, while extreme droughts are predicted to be more frequent and intense. Here, the potential of temporal autocorrelation of high‐frequency variability in Landsat Enhanced Vegetation Index (EVI), an indicator of ecosystem resilience, to predict spatial and temporal variations of forest biomass mortality is evaluated against in situ census observations for 64 site‐year combinations in Costa Rican tropical dry forests during the 2015 ENSO drought. Temporal autocorrelation, within the optimal moving window of 24 months, demonstrated robust predictive power for in situ mortality (leave‐one‐out cross‐validation R 2 = 0.54), which allows for estimates of annual biomass mortality patterns at 30 m resolution. Subsequent spatial analysis showed substantial fine‐scale heterogeneity of forest mortality patterns, largely driven by drought intensity and ecosystem properties related to plant water use such as forest deciduousness and topography. Highly deciduous forest patches demonstrated much lower mortality sensitivity to drought stress than less deciduous forest patches after elevation was controlled. Our results highlight the potential of high‐resolution remote sensing to “fingerprint” forest mortality and the significant role of ecosystem heterogeneity in forest biomass resistance to drought.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".