Meta‐analysis shows forest soil <scp> CO <sub>2</sub> </scp> effluxes are dependent on the disturbance regime and biome type
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Forest soil CO 2 efflux (FCO 2 ) is a crucial process in global carbon cycling; however, how FCO 2 responds to disturbance regimes in different forest biomes is poorly understood. We quantified the effects of disturbance regimes on FCO 2 across boreal, temperate, tropical and Mediterranean forests based on 1240 observations from 380 studies. Globally, climatic perturbations such as elevated CO 2 concentration, warming and increased precipitation increase FCO 2 by 13% to 25%. FCO 2 is increased by forest conversion to grassland and elevated carbon input by forest management practices but reduced by decreased carbon input, fire and acid rain. Disturbance also changes soil temperature and water content, which in turn affect the direction and magnitude of disturbance influences on FCO 2 . FCO 2 is disturbance‐ and biome‐type dependent and such effects should be incorporated into earth system models to improve the projection of the feedback between the terrestrial C cycle and climate change.
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 | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".