MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7097666431

1 TCP Progress Report and Renewal Proposal: Measuring the Effects of Stand Age and Soil Drainage on Boreal Forest Net Ecosystem Production

2014· article· en· W7097666431 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEddy covarianceTaigaCarbon cycleBorealEcosystemDrainagePrimary productionSoil carbonForest ecology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We request support to continue investigating the exchange of CO2 between the atmosphere and the boreal forest in Manitoba, Canada. During the last two years we have used year-round eddy covariance and associated ecological measurements to study the effects of forest age on forest-atmosphere CO2 exchange. During the next three years we plan to: (1) complete our study of the effect of stand age on CO2 exchange by collecting 18 more months of data at six sites that differ in time since burn from 4 years to 150 years, and (2) begin investigating the effect of soil drainage on carbon balance. Our work to date has yielded several major payoffs for DOE’s TCP Program. We have (1) designed, tested, and demonstrated a lightweight, fully portable eddy flux system that will allow relatively inexpensive year-round measurements of CO2 exchange at almost any micrometeorologically-suitable site, (2) added six year-round sites to AmeriFlux, at a relatively low per site cost, and (3a) developed a partial understanding of how and why ecosystem carbon balance changes as forests age. Our work during the next three years will add to this list of payoffs. We will (3b) develop a much more complete understanding of how and why ecosystem carbon balance changes as forests age, and (4) develop an understanding of how soil drainage affects NEP, and how the carbon balance of poorly-drained sites compares with that of nearby well drained sites. All of these issues have been identified by the US Global Carbon Cycle Plan and the North American Carbon Cycle Plan as problems or approaches that merit priority attention. 2

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.084
Threshold uncertainty score0.168

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0030.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.005

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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPlant Water Relations and Carbon Dynamics→French-language works237,207→