Method / resourcemodel-written summary

SIF indicators had an AGPP prediction root mean square error of 414.7 gC·m −2 ·year −1.

A claim from Developing and evaluating satellite-derived phenology and physiology indicators for modeling annual gross primary productivity variability · 2025

Method / resourceobservedoriginal resultpositivemeasured

Claim · model-written summary

SIF indicators had an AGPP prediction root mean square error of 414.7 gC·m −2 ·year −1.

Taxon
vegetatione1
Outcome
root mean square errore0
Direction
higheste0
Value
414.7 gC·m −2 ·year −1e0
Comparator
LAI- and EVI-based indicatorse0

Not reportedMaterialGeneCompoundOrgan / stageInteractorInteractor roleSecond interactorSecond interactor roleTreatmentSettingQualifier

Verbatim

e0

“SIF-based indicators exhibited the highest accuracy (Pearson's r ​= ​0.79; root mean square error ​= ​414.7 gC·m −2 ·year −1 ), outperforming LAI- and EVI-based indicators”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 702–873
t0

“phenology and physiology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · title, characters 44–68
e1

“vegetation physiology, particularly the seasonal maximum gross primary production, plays a more dominant role in regulating AGPP than phenology”

✓ located verbatim in the source · abstract, characters 1126–1269

Title

Developing and evaluating satellite-derived phenology and physiology indicators for modeling annual gross primary productivity variability

Hanliang Gui; Qinchuan Xin; Xuewen Zhou; et al. Forest Ecosystems 2025. doi:10.1016/j.fecs.2025.100375

Other claims from this paper (4)

Record rev-90b142eeb0c415da2f2d315499dcf701d61b1181b4142767701dd99610f4bfb8 · schema claims-v0.9 · position 2 in the model’s answer