MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4362595295 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/acca34

Climate-driven land surface phenology advance is overestimated due to ignoring land cover changes

2023· article· en· W4362595295 on OpenAlexaff
Yuhao Pan, Dailiang Peng, Jing M. Chen, Ranga B. Myneni, Xiaoyang Zhang, Alfredo Huete, Yongshuo H. Fu, Shijun Zheng, Kai Yan, Le Yu, Peng Zhu, Miaogen Shen, Weimin Ju, Wenquan Zhu, Qiaoyun Xie, Wenjiang Huang, Zhengchao Chen, Jingfeng Huang, Chaoyang Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRemote Sensing in Agriculture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsClimate changeClimatologyPrecipitationNorthern HemisphereEvapotranspirationLand coverEnvironmental scienceGlobal changePhenologyGlobal warmingVegetation (pathology)Physical geographyLand useGeographyEcologyGeologyMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Global warming has led to earlier spring green-up dates (GUDs) in recent decades with significant consequences for global carbon and hydrologic cycles. In addition to changes in climate, land cover change (LCC), including interchanges between vegetation and non-vegetation, and among plants with different functional traits, may also affect GUD. Here, we analyzed how satellite-derived GUD from 1992 to 2020 was impacted by changes in temperature, precipitation, standardized precipitation evapotranspiration index (SPEI), solar radiation, and LCC for the Northern Hemisphere (>30° N). While the climate variables had larger impact overall, variability in GUD was controlled by LCC for 6% of the Northern Hemisphere, with systematically earlier or later changes among transitions between different land cover types. These changes were found mainly along the southeastern coast of the United States, in Central-north Europe, and across northeastern China. We further showed that climate change attribution of earlier GUD during 1992–2020 was overestimated by three days when the impact of LCC was ignored. Our results deepen the understanding of how LCC impacts GUD variability and enables scientists to more accurately evaluate the impact of climate change on land surface phenology.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.620
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.021

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.266 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
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

Citations16
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicRemote Sensing in AgricultureFrench-language works237,207