Improved quantification of cover crop biomass and ecosystem services through remote sensing-based model–data fusion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Cover crops have long been seen as an effective management practice to increase soil organic carbon (SOC) and reduce nitrogen (N) leaching. However, there are large uncertainties in quantifying these ecosystem services using either observation (e.g. field measurement, remote sensing data) or process-based modeling. In this study, we developed and implemented a model–data fusion (MDF) framework to improve the quantification of cover crop benefits in SOC accrual and N retention in central Illinois by integrating process-based modeling and remotely-sensed observations. Specifically, we first constrained and validated the process-based agroecosystem model, ecosys , using observations of cover crop aboveground biomass derived from satellite-based spectral signals, which is highly consistent with field measurements. Then, we compared the simulated cover crop benefits in SOC accrual and N leaching reduction with and without the constraints of remotely-sensed cover crop aboveground biomass. When benchmarked with remote sensing-based observations, the constrained simulations all show significant improvements in quantifying cover crop aboveground biomass C compared with the unconstrained ones, with R 2 increasing from 0.60 to 0.87, and root mean square error (RMSE) and absolute bias decreasing by 64% and 97%, respectively. On all study sites, the constrained simulations of aboveground biomass C and N at termination are 29% and 35% lower than the unconstrained ones on average. Correspondingly, the averages of simulated SOC accrual and N retention net benefits are 31% and 23% lower than the unconstrained simulations, respectively. Our results show that the MDF framework with remotely-sensed biomass constraints effectively reduced the uncertainties in cover crop biomass simulations, which further constrained the quantification of cover crop-induced ecosystem services in increasing SOC and reducing N leaching.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".