MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4322210890 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu23-15103

Assessing cryosphere-biosphere linkages in boreal forests with Earth Observation and modelling

2023· preprint· en· W4322210890 on OpenAlexaffabout
Kristin Boettcher, Tea Thum, Kimmo Rautiainen, Mika Aurela, Jouni Pulliainen, Stephen Plummer, Bruce Johnson, Sampsa Koponen, Fabrice Lacroix, Sönke Zaehle

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPermafrostEnvironmental scienceTaigaBorealCryosphereBiosphereClimate changeCarbon cycleVegetation (pathology)Biosphere modelClimatologyAtmospheric sciencesSoil carbonSnowEddy covarianceEcosystemPhysical geographyEcologySoil waterForestryGeographySea iceSoil scienceGeologyMeteorologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change induced increases in surface temperatures in the northern high-latitudes have consequences for cryosphere conditions in the boreal zone (snow cover, soil freeze-thaw and permafrost). Cryosphere changes will in turn influence the biosphere e. g. through changes in the carbon uptake and release by vegetation. However, the current knowledge about these interactions is insufficient for assessing the carbon balance accurately and uncertainties remain in model predictions of how the carbon cycle will respond to the changing climate.In this work, we assessed the suitability of satellite-based and in situ soil freeze and thaw observations to inform on the start and end of the carbon uptake period in boreal forest and modelling to investigate the relationship between freeze-thaw dynamics and the carbon uptake and release by boreal forest ecosystems. Eddy covariance measurements from six coniferous forest sites in Finland and Canada were used to determine the start and end dates of the carbon uptake period. Satellite-based soil freeze and thaw dates, determined from the ESA SMOS Level 3 Soil Freeze and Thaw product (Rautiainen et al. 2016) for the period 2010 to 2020, agreed well in timing with site level observations and significant relationships with start and end dates of the carbon uptake period were found. This suggests that SMOS soil thaw and freeze dates could be used in the estimation of the length of the carbon uptake period in boreal coniferous forests although the relationship weakens for the warmer southern boreal site (Hyytiälä, Finland).For the modelling, the terrestrial biosphere model QUINCY (QUantifying Interactions between Nutrient Cycles and the climate) (Thum et al. 2019) will be applied at three coniferous forest sites, stretching from the southern to the northern boreal zone. QUINCY has a multi-layer snow scheme (Lacroix et al. 2022) and fully coupled carbon, water, energy, and nitrogen cycles. First simulations were carried out for a Scots pine forest at Sodankylä (Finland). At the Sodankylä site, gross primary production (GPP) started when soil thaw was detected from in situ and satellite observations. The increase of total ecosystem respiration (TER) lagged behind GPP in spring and occurred when snow had melted. QUINCY captured the seasonal cycle of GPP well, however, simulated TER showed biases in spring that were related to snow melt dynamics. Simulations showed snow depth was too low and melting was too early which in turn led to increase in simulated TER too early in the year. The QUINCY modelling will be extended to sites Hyytiälä (Finland) and the Saskatchewan, Old Jack Pine forest (Canada). In further work, we plan to combine satellite information on snow melt with soil thaw and freeze to provide proxy indicators on the carbon uptake and release period that could be utilized in model evaluation. ReferencesThum, T., et al., 2019. Geosci. Model Dev. 12, 4781-4802.Rautiainen, K., et al., 2016. Remote Sensing of Environment, SMOS special issue 180, 346-360.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.220
Threshold uncertainty score0.438

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.133
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.152 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicClimate change and permafrost→French-language works237,207→