NIRP as a remote sensing proxy for measuring gross primary production across different biomes and climate zones: Performance and limitations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The product of near-infrared radiation reflected by vegetation (NIRv) and PAR (NIRvP) is a promising proxy for the remote estimation of gross primary production (GPP). However, the efficiency of NIRvP in estimating the GPP and its limitations across multiple biomes and climate zones remain unclear. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the performance and limitations of NIRvP in estimating the GPP in comparison to absorbed photosynthetically active radiation (APAR), solar-induced chlorophyll fluorescence (SIF), and the MOD17A2H GPP product. Overall, the correlation between NIRvP and eddy covariance (EC) GPP was stronger than that of APAR, SIF, and MOD17A2H GPP across most biomes with usually similar seasonal variations in radiation, air temperature (TA), and precipitation. The near-infrared (NIR) reflectance (ρNIR) and light use efficiency (LUE) exhibited a covarying relationship under these environmental conditions, which suggested that the ρNIR contributed positively to the NIRvP-GPP relationship under such climatic conditions. However, the performance of NIRvP was poor in some biomes and climate zones, which exhibited different variations in the seasonal patterns of radiation, TA, and precipitation. The resulting inconsistencies between ρNIR and LUE implied that the ρNIR contributed negatively to the NIRvP-GPP relationship in these regions. Altogether, the findings demonstrated that the NIRvP-GPP relationship was robust but attained a moderate overall relationship across ecosystems (R2 < 0.50) in the majority of biomes and climate zones. In addition, this study also elucidated the limitations of NIRvP as a GPP proxy in certain climate zones, which was attributed to the synergistic contributions of APAR and ρNIR in the NIRvP-GPP relationship.
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 | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".