Vegetation clumping modulates global photosynthesis through adjusting canopy light environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The spatial dispersion of photoelements within a vegetation canopy, quantified by the clumping index (CI), directly regulates the within‐canopy light environment and photosynthesis rate, but is not commonly implemented in terrestrial biosphere models to estimate the ecosystem carbon cycle. A few global CI products have been developed recently with remote sensing measurements, making it possible to examine the global impacts of CI. This study deployed CI in the radiative transfer scheme of the Community Land Model version 5 (CLM5) and used the revised CLM5 to quantitatively evaluate the extent to which CI can affect canopy absorbed radiation and gross primary production (GPP), and for the first time, considering the uncertainty and seasonal variation of CI with multiple remote sensing products. Compared to the results without considering the CI impact, the revised CLM5 estimated that sunlit canopy absorbed up to 9%–15% and 23%–34% less direct and diffuse radiation, respectively, while shaded canopy absorbed 3%–18% more diffuse radiation across different biome types. The CI impacts on canopy light conditions included changes in canopy light absorption, and sunlit–shaded leaf area fraction related to nitrogen distribution and thus the maximum rate of Rubisco carboxylase activity (Vcmax), which together decreased photosynthesis in sunlit canopy by 5.9–7.2 PgC year−1 while enhanced photosynthesis by 6.9–8.2 PgC year−1 in shaded canopy. With higher light use efficiency of shaded leaves, shaded canopy increased photosynthesis compensated and exceeded the lost photosynthesis in sunlit canopy, resulting in 1.0 ± 0.12 PgC year−1 net increase in GPP. The uncertainty of GPP due to the different input CI datasets was much larger than that caused by CI seasonal variations, and was up to 50% of the magnitude of GPP interannual variations in the tropical regions. This study highlights the necessity of considering the impacts of CI and its uncertainty in terrestrial biosphere models.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".