text:
Controls on autotrophic and heterotrophic respiration in an ombrotrophic bog
Tracy E. Rankin et al.
Final revised paper (published on 15 Jul 2022)
Preprint (discussion started on 20 Oct 2021)
Comment types: AC – author | RC – referee | CC – community | EC – editor | CEC – chief editor | : Report abuse
RC1: 'Comment on bg-2021-270', Anonymous Referee #1, 15 Nov 2021
This study used field measurements of CO2 fluxes from control and vegetation removal plots to estimate ecosystem respiration, heterotrophic respiration (HR), and autotrophic respiration (AR) in an ombrotrophic bog ecosystem over two growing seasons. The study analyzed the correlations of temperature and water table with respiration fluxes for the two years. The sensitivity of different respiration fluxes to environmental factors is an important question with implications for understanding ecosystem carbon flux responses to changing climate, as is well explained in the Introduction. I thought the study was well designed and produced a valuable dataset for understanding these fluxes and their controls in bog ecosystems.
In my opinion the statistical analysis portion of the study had some weaknesses that could be addressed.
First, some of the statistical methods are not explained in enough detail in the methods section. In particular, it's not clear how the "multiple regression trees" were conducted or how this method was defined. A full explanation and/or citation for that method would be helpful.
Second, the statistical methods rely on linear regressions. Moisture interactions with respiration in particular are often nonlinear (a threshold dependence is suggested in the Discussion, for example) so I would recommend testing whether linear relationships are an appropriate model for the processes of interest and, if not, applying nonlinear methods where appropriate.
Third, it's not clear why the two years were analyzed separately instead of combined as a single dataset. Since it was all the same site and treatments, it would make sense to treat the whole time series as a common dataset and potentially this would give the overall statistical analysis more power. While it is interesting to see if some relationships differed across years, I think a good default assumption would be that the site should behave similarly in different years unless there is a compelling reason to expect otherwise. I suggest conducting the statistical analysis for the whole dataset across both years and perhaps contrasting those results with analyses for individual years if there are significant differences.
Finally, the results of the statistical analysis that are present are very limited. Only statistical significance metrics, coefficients of variation, and R2 values are shown. This means that the manuscript never reports the direction or slope of the linear relationships and therefore leaves out a lot of potentially useful information. Statistical significance measures on their own are much less informative if they are not matched with information on how the relationships actually looked. I would recommend at minimum including the linear regression parameters (slope and intercept) in a table. Even more useful would be scatter plots with regression lines showing the data and fit relationships for fluxes and environmental factors (especially if some of the relationships were particularly interesting or significant). Overall, it seems like the study generated a useful dataset but did not fully analyze it.
Line 63-68: This explanation of "plant-mediated HR" did not make sense to me. First it is explained as plants fixing carbon that was recently respired from surrounding vegetation. This isn't HR, it's reabsorption of respired CO2. And I don't see why this is a problem for calculating ER. From the perspective of ecosystem carbon balance, it shouldn't matter if the carbon source for photosynthesis came from ecosystem respiration or from the atmosphere — aren't they all carbon molecules in the end? Does it make a difference how far they traveled? Later, plant-mediated HR is explained as having to do with root-soil interactions and litter supply, which seems like a different issue from reabsorption of respired CO2. A different process that could be called "plant-mediated HR" is supply of C to the rhizosphere that is immediately respired by heterotrophic organisms. This explanation is more consistent with the Discussion paragraph on this topic, which is mostly about rhizosphere priming effects. This does seem like an issue for partitioning AR and HR because it is plant-supplied C that would be cut off by removing plants but it is not strictly AR. But this does not fit with the explanation of "plant-mediated HR" in the Introduction text.
Line 123-125: The wording here sounds like the vegetation removal happened under dark conditions, but I think what is meant is that CO2 flux was only measured under dark conditions (not light conditions) in plots where vegetation or mosses were removed. Not that the vegetation removal itself was done in the dark.
Line 124: Plots with mosses removed are later referred to as "shrub-only plots." The same terminology should be used throughout the manuscript.
Line 209: The text says that ER and HR were correlated with air and soil temperatures, but based on Table 2 soil T was only significant in one year.
Line 247: Were the influences positive or negative? And how strong? Only providing statistical significance measures and nothing else leaves out the most important information here
Line 225: Again, knowing that this interaction was significant is less useful than knowing what the relationship looked like.
Line 265: The relative influences of soil T and water table on fluxes could be determined from the parameters of the multiple regressions rather than speculating about it based on qualitative looks from the figures as this sentence does.
Line 274-275: The relative contributions of AR to ER under different conditions could be shown directly with a scatter plot of the relevant processes, or by referring to parameters of the linear regressions.
Line 276-277: If there is a real statistical connection between AR and environmental drivers, then why would higher variability in environmental drivers cause the relationship to be weaker? Might this suggest that the apparent relationship is due to some other covariate that varies more slowly over the year? Or that respiration responds to environmental drivers at a particular time scale?
Line 278-280: A threshold relationship with WT could be shown directly with a scatter plot of WT versus respiration. Also, a threshold response is inherently nonlinear which suggests that linear regression may not provide an accurate picture of the relationship.
Line 304: It seems speculative to talk about symbiotic relationships here. The data don't have enough detail to say whether there is a symbiotic component to the observed correlations.
Line 305-309: This should be in the results section
Line 322: Wouldn't this be an interaction term in the multiple regression? The regression would indicate whether the interaction term was significant or not. And conducting the statistics across both years instead of separately by year could give better statistical power.
Figure 1: I think it would be helpful to superimpose continuous measurements of temperature and water table (as lines) along with the dots showing values when fluxes were measured. This would allow those time points to be placed in the context of the whole time series.
Figures 3 and 4: I found these plots difficult to read with all the different colored dots. Connecting the dots with lines or plotting as bars rather than dots might make these figures easier to interpret.
Figure 5: This figure should have separate panels for the two years (similar to the previous figures) or show one long time series. Plotting them on top of each other makes the plot difficult to read.
Table 2 and 3: The bold and italics notation for different years is difficult to read, especially since the order of years is not consistent. Also, there's no reason not to show all the data. These tables should just have a line for each year (two lines per environmental variable) and show all the values (whether statistically significant or not). And, ideally, include statistics over both years of combined data. Also, the regression parameters (slope(s) and intercept) should be included.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-2021-270-RC1
AC1: 'Reply on RC1', Tracy Rankin, 26 Nov 2021
We will address each of the comments in order.
In the revised manuscript, we will insert more details and explanations of the statistical methods that we used.
We will discuss this in the revised manuscript. We did test for linear and non-linear relationships over the range of our empirical observed data. The relationships were linear within that range and therefore appropriate for this particular project. We will also point out that others have found non-linear relationships with a different range of data.
We will discuss this in the revised manuscript, but we looked at the relationships across two different years. However, the years were significantly different, and it raises the question if the data can be treated as being from the same population.
We will include in the revised manuscript a table of the additional regression parameters. We did scatter plots as part of the analysis and if the editor feels these add useful information we can include them in a supplemental document. We did not include them in the body of the article or as supplemental material originally as we felt they did not add significantly to the results presented.
We will discuss that there are three sources of CO2 belowground for which we cannot discriminate: CO2 that is supplied as a substrate by the vascular plants (priming effect), root respiration itself, and heterotrophic respiration by microbial bacteria, etc. that is not associated with the roots.
Instead of using the term "plant-mediated HR'', we'll discuss respiration more as an association of CO2 with the structure of the peat. For example, with regards to the mosses, we have recycled C as CO2 that is refixed by the mosses to be used in photosynthesis. We will revise the manuscript accordingly to clarify this.
We will change the wording in the methods to make it clear that removal was done first then CO2 fluxes were measured under dark conditions.
We will make sure to use the same terminology throughout.
We will make sure to be clear in which year the significant relationships were found.
Although it was mentioned in lines 213-215 if the influences were positive or negative, we agree that there was no mention of the strength of these relationships. As stated above, we will include in the table some of the other statistical parameters to show the strength of the relationships.
Figure 5 can be broken up into two years with a line showing the average in AR contributions so that the variation is more evident, which is actually a suggestion made in another comment below. We agree with this suggestion and will revise the figure as such as well as refer back to this figure in line 225 to make the variations in AR easier to see.
We will refer back to the statistics when explaining the influences of the environmental variables.
As there are already figures of the time series of weather conditions and AR contributions, adding additional scatter plots will not add much to the paper. We will include, though, evidence from the statistical analyses in the text to give more credence to the claims.
You make a good point here! However, with the limited sample size in AR fluxes, the relationship, as it would have been, may not have been captured properly. It may be that the respiration responds at a different time scale than our study period. The way to resolve this would be to use continuous measurements (e.g. automatic chambers), which we do not have for this study. We will revise accordingly.
We will add a scatterplot as a supplemental figure as stated above, but the relationships were linear within the range of our observed data, so we felt that linear regressions were appropriate.
We will move away from using the word "symbiosis" and explain instead that there is a possibility of the mosses and vascular plants having a mutual benefit to one another by their presence in the ecosystem (the vascular plants provide a source of CO2 that may diffuse through the mosses, while the mosses provide moisture in the water they retain during extended periods of drought).
We do believe with the data we've obtained that this is a valid possibility. But, we will revise the manuscript to be more clear that this is a speculation and that we're not making a conclusive statement.
Agreed, we shall move up to the results section and simply refer to the table in the text here.
Indeed the multiple regressions would tell us whether the interaction term was significant or not, but since 2018 was an anomalous year in terms of weather conditions, we believe lumping the data from the two years will only give a spurious relationship.
The time series in Figure 1 shows values for the environmental variables taken at the same time as the flux measurements, so the continuous measurements were added as an appendix mainly to contextualize the manual measurements. They do correlate though, if we look at the values on the same day between the manual and continuous measurements. We can add a graph to the appendix to show this if the editor and reviewers think it would be helpful.
We will try various ways of reporting the fluxes so the figures in the revised manuscript will be easier to interpret.
Agreed, as stated above. This will be done for the revised manuscript as well as including the average AR contributions so the variation is more prominent.
We will include the regression parameters and will separate the two years of data in the table. Adding all of the non-significant data though may make the table too busy and we feel it won't add to the paper as these values won't be discussed in the text.
Citation: https://doi.org/10.5194/bg-2021-270-AC1
RC2: 'Comment on bg-2021-270', Anonymous Referee #2, 14 Jan 2022
This manuscript presents data from a field experiment where CO2 fluxes were measured in control, complete vegetation removal, and moss removal plots in an ombrotrophic bog in order to estimate ecosystem respiration. Further, the vegetation removal treatments were used to partition respiration into contributions from autotrophic respiration and heterotrophic respiration. Measurements were conducted across two growing seasons, and respiration measurements were coupled with measurements of environmental variables such as water table height and air and soil temperatures in order to identify drivers of respiration across the growing season and among different vegetation types.
While the objectives of this study and the rich dataset are valuable contributions to the field, I agree with many points made by Reviewer 1 in addressing the statistical weaknesses of this paper. I find six key points that warrant attention on behalf of the authors to improve the strength of this paper's analyses and conclusions.
The structure of the discussion is rather confusing. Perhaps separating the discussion section into environmental predictors of AR vs. environmental predictors of HR, temporal variability in AR and HR, and vegetation type differences in respiration would make for a more succinct discussion that directly relates to your manuscript's stated objectives.
As Reviewer 1 suggests, a clearer definition of the methods used as part of the "multiple regression trees" is necessary. Further, I suggest instead using model comparison and selection methods like step-wise AIC comparison of models to identify the suite of variables that best explain HR and AR in bog areas dominated by different vegetation types. This would better allow you to identify the most predictive combination of variables in this system.
I disagree with the author's discussion of "plant mediated HR" in this manuscript. In the introduction, the author's define plant mediated HR as photosynthesis conducted using CO2 respired by surrounding plants instead of CO2 sourced from ambient pools. This variable is not measured at any point in this study and would require isotopic analyses of plant biomass, assuming that plant mediated HR results in significant fractionation of C isotopes so that photosynthate from plant mediated HR would bear a distinct isotopic signature than would photosynthate from ambient sources. While the authors postulate many credible theories as to why the presence of mosses and the functional differences between shrubs and sedges might alter the physical and chemical properties that influence respiration, these ideas should instead be discussed in a section that is dedicated to describing differences in respiration among vegetation types, eliminating the rather confusing term "plant mediated HR".
As Reviewer 1 mentioned, the results that the authors report are compelling but insufficient to give readers a clear understanding of how the environmental variables measured here influence respiration. The tables and manuscript text should be amended to include correlation coefficients that report the magnitude and direction of the relationships analyzed in this manuscript, and all results should be reported regardless of whether or not the relationships are statistically significant. Insignificant results are interesting too! Other aspects of the tables are confusing as well. Instead of including 2018 and 2019 data in the same columns with different font faces to differentiate them, consider including separate columns for each year (unless you choose to analyze data from both years together, as suggested by Reviewer 1). I also don't understand what the second row of data under some environmental variable labels (i.e. row 2 of data in Table 2) refers to. Table structure must be amended in all tables in this manuscript to improve clarity.
The figures in this manuscript are often visually unclear or confusing. In Figure 2, the colors used to indicate drying vs. rewetting points are virtually identical and extremely difficult to differentiate. Perhaps change the size, color, and transparency of the points in this figure to allow readers to see differences near the asymptotes where many points are stacked on top of one another. In Figures 3 and 4, the colors for ER and NEE are also too similar to distinguish, especially when considering that the figures would be much smaller in the final published article. In Figure 5, why not include error bars for AR contribution data points as the authors did in Figures 3 and 4? It is also difficult to distinguish between the blue colors used in Figure 5 for the shrub plots. While connecting the points with lines across the growing season would help readers distinguish temporal trends in AR contributions among your treatments, I suggest averaging AR contributions in each plot across the growing season and then visualizing differences in AR contributions among growing season years and vegetation types using boxplots. These differences can then be verified using and ANOVA test. For Table 2, I would prefer to see panels of linear regressions that depict the relationships between respiration components and environmental variables. This table of statistical results can then be moved into the appendix.
An important spatial component of bogs that this manuscript largely ignores is the hummock/hollow variation in microtopography. I would suggest reframing the objectives of this study as analyzing temporal/vegetative variation in bog respiration dynamics to reflect your experimental design more accurately.
Specific line comments:
Line 121: How much time elapsed between the removal of plant biomass and the installation of root exclosures and the first CO2 flux measurements? Were vegetation removal treatments reapplied throughout the two years of measurements?
Line 182: Because hysteresis does exist to some degree, and the amount of hysteresis varies among years, why not use VWC measurements as your variable that represents soil moisture conditions instead of WT height?
Lines 202-208: Be consistent when reporting p-values. I tend to see 3 decimal places for p-values reported, with exact values used instead of simply reporting significance thresholds.
Line 216: There's a small typo here, "mater" should probably be "water".
Line 222: I do not think that you have the evidence to support your claim that variation in rain events (sporadic rain events) drives greater variation in AR among vegetation types. Furthermore, throughout this paragraph, you should report the coefficient of variation more accurately instead of rounding, as well as p-values and F-statistics stemming from an ANOVA that should be used to properly test the differences in AR contributions among vegetation types or among years. Furthermore, reporting your degrees of freedom associated with the F-statistic in these analyses would help the readers understand how many independent measurements are used in your analyses.
Lines 231-235: This paragraph is unnecessary given the use of subheadings in your discussion.
Lines 240-243: Perhaps remove reference to Moore et al. 2002 and Stewart et al. 2006 because these studies are not directly comparable to your results given differences in measurement methodology, which you note.
Line 305: When you say "importance of 70%", what is the statistic that you are reporting here, and from which statistical test is this number derived?
Lines 322-330: As Reviewer 1 stated in their comments, the relationship between the environmental variables and respiration components discussed in this paragraph likely stem from non-linear relationships between respiration and soil moisture in particular. Using statistical tests beyond linear regressions would be a more appropriate way to test this hypothesis.
Line 338: Other studies such as Rewcastle et al. 2020 (Pedosphere) use different methods of root exclosures that eliminate the possibility of CO2 flux stemming from residual root decomposition, yet also find rather variable HR rates owing to water table and soil moisture differences irrespective of bog microtopography differences.
Line 331-348: As in other sections of this manuscript, the results that you report must be more specific. Report exact p-values instead of significance, and report p-values even for insignificant results. Results from regressions should include correlation coefficients as well, and results from ANOVA tests should include F-statistics with degrees of freedom to communicate replication in your study.
Line 354: My understanding of the literature surrounding bog decomposition suggests the opposite, that the high degree of secondary compounds in moss litter inhibits microbial activity, while vascular plant litter and root exudates often have a priming effect on microbial activity in bog ecosystems. Evapotranspiration surrounding vascular plants might also increase oxygen availability by lowering the water table in proximity to deeply-rooted plants, again stimulating microbial activity (further supporting the pattern observed by Zeh et al. 2020).
Line 375: I would suggest referencing a study other than Hungate et al. 1997 that confirms this ecological principle in bogs rather than grasslands owing to the complex physio-chemical regulation of the carbon cycle in frequently water-saturated ecosystems like bogs.
AC2: 'Reply on RC2', Tracy Rankin, 04 Feb 2022
We thank the reviewer for their comments and suggestions. We will address each one in turn below.
As AR is a residual term (difference between ER and HR), and AR is hence dependent on HR, we believe that separating the environmental predictors of AR and HR into two sections is not a favourable option. Perhaps re-wording the section headings though, and moving up the last paragraph of section 4.1 to right after line 254, would make the flow better?
As Reviewer 1 suggests, a clearer definition of the methods used as part of the "multiple regression trees'' is necessary. Further, I suggest instead using model comparison and selection methods like stepwise AIC comparison of models to identify the suite of variables that best explain HR and AR in bog areas dominated by different vegetation types. This would better allow you to identify the most predictive combination of variables in this system.
As was stated in the reply to reviewer 1, the authors will provide a clearer definition of the methods used, especially with regards to the multiple regression trees. The authors thank the reviewer for the additional suggestions. We will look into conducting the stepwise AIC and will add the results in the revised manuscript if necessary.
As stated in the reply to reviewer 1 comments, instead of using the term "plant-mediated HR'', we will discuss respiration more as an association of CO2 with the structure of the peat. For example, with regard to the mosses, we have recycled C as CO2 that is refixed by the mosses to be used in photosynthesis. We will revise the manuscript accordingly to clarify this.
We will also discuss that there are three sources of CO2 belowground which we cannot discriminate: CO2 that is supplied as a substrate by the vascular plants (priming effect), root respiration itself, and heterotrophic respiration by microbial bacteria, etc. that is not associated with the roots.
The authors will revise the tables to improve clarity and as stated in the reply to reviewer 1 comments, we will include in the revised manuscript a table of the additional regression parameters and will separate the two years of data in the table. Adding all of the non-significant data though may make the table too busy and we feel it will not add to the paper as these values will not be discussed in the text. We also drew scatter plots as part of the analysis, and if the editor feels these add useful information, we can include them in a supplemental document.
The figures in this manuscript are often visually unclear or confusing. In Figure 2, the colors used to indicate drying vs. rewetting points are virtually identical and extremely difficult to differentiate. Perhaps change the size, color, and transparency of the points in this figure to allow readers to see differences near the asymptotes where many points are stacked on top of one another. In Figures 3 and 4, the colors for ER and NEE are also too similar to distinguish, especially when considering that the figures would be much smaller in the final published article. It is also difficult to distinguish between the blue colors used in Figure 5 for the shrub plots.
We will make all the figures clearer with regards to size and color.
In Figure 5, why not include error bars for AR contribution data points as the authors did in Figures 3 and 4? While connecting the points with lines across the growing season would help readers distinguish temporal trends in AR contributions among your treatments, I suggest averaging AR contributions in each plot across the growing season and then visualizing differences in AR contributions among growing season years and vegetation types using boxplots. These differences can then be verified using an ANOVA test.
As AR is a residual term, we did not think it was possible to include error bars nor to conduct an ANOVA test, but will add the error bars and results of ANOVA test if this is possible.
For Table 2, I would prefer to see panels of linear regressions that depict the relationships between respiration components and environmental variables. This table of statistical results can then be moved into the appendix.
Reviewer 1 also suggested this and as stated in the reply, we felt that adding all of the non-significant data would make the table too busy and will not add to the paper as these values will not be discussed in the text, but we can include them in a supplemental document along with correlations.
We examined patterns of respiration in hummocks, which represent 70% of the bog, and incorporated mosses, shrubs and sedges.
We will explain this more clearly in the text.
We do not have SWC measurements for the different treatments, only the data from the probes near the eddy covariance tower. We could show that the relationship between WTD and SWC are correlated though, and that WTD is thus a reasonable surrogate for changes in SWC, though it is different because of the hysteresis present.
We will revise accordingly.
We will revise accordingly regarding the reporting of the statistics. Our comments on the impact of sporadic rain events were speculative and we will make it clear that we are not claiming a cause-effect relationship.
Perhaps the word "explanation" should have been used here instead of "importance"? We will revise accordingly.
As stated in the reply to reviewer 1 comments, we will discuss this in the revised manuscript. We did test for linear and non-linear relationships over the range of our data. The relationships were linear within that range and therefore appropriate for this particular project. We will also point out that others have found non-linear relationships with a different range of data.
The authors thank the reviewer for the suggested citation and we will include it in the paper, although they are dealing with a forested bog rather than a shrub-dominated bog like Mer Bleu.
The other papers cited do suggest what we are arguing, although we have no way of confirming our suggestion, so we will present the alternative (Zeh's paper) as a contrast.
We will search for a more recent study that was conducted in a bog and the authors thank the reviewer for the suggestion.
Peer review completion
ED: Reconsider after major revisions (07 Feb 2022) by Martin De Kauwe
Both reviews made a range of positive suggestions and I think you have proposed a range of important revisions. I am recommending major revisions in light of their comments.
In particular, I would like you to further consider the point R1 makes about treating the years as a single dataset. If you consider them to be entirely different, I think you should demonstrate this via some statistical test and/or motivate the text better so the reader is clearer on this analysis. For me, while I have no issue in itself with analysing the years separately, it does raise questions about how general our interpretations can be as the entire dataset is only two years long and variability is marked. This needs to be carefully addressed in revision.
Martin De Kauwe
AR by Tracy Rankin on behalf of the Authors (31 Mar 2022) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript
ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (31 Mar 2022) by Martin De Kauwe
RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (14 Apr 2022)
The revised manuscript has substantially improved the explanation of the methods and results, and the updated figures represent significant improvements in terms of data presentation and readability. I thought the new Figures S1 and S2 were particularly useful for showing the relationships among fluxes and key environmental drivers. The changes to the text and figures also clarify the rationale for separating the analysis of the two years. Overall I think the revisions to the manuscript have addressed the concerns I raised in my previous review. My main remaining suggestion would be to include Figures S1 and S2 in the main text rather than supplementary material. These figures show very clearly the relationships with carbon fluxes, temperatures, and water table that are a focus of the manuscript and they provide useful clarity when paired with the time series plots in Figures 3 and 4. I feel that the supplemental figures represent an important component of the manuscript's main message and therefore fit better in the main text.
In Figure S1 and S2, I would also suggest showing which points were from high or low WT periods in all the panels, not just the WT Depth panels. Showing those differences in the plots of fluxes vs. temperature would help to visualize some of the interactions between temperature and water table and make it easier to see how the different ranges of water table conditions coincided with temperature conditions.
Other specific comments:
Line 163: "anomalously warm year in many places across the globe" – I would say whether it was an anomalously warm year in this site specifically, since other places on the globe don't directly impact these measured fluxes.
Line 329-330: This conclusion suggests that showing the shrub only plots in scatter plots as in Figure S1 might be a useful addition.
See document below.
ED: Reconsider after major revisions (24 Apr 2022) by Martin De Kauwe
Two reviewers have now seen your revised work. While R1 is largely satisfied with the new manuscript, R2 strongly feels that the revisions did not go far enough (despite recognising the potential significance of your work). I am recommending major revisions are necessary before this manuscript can be reconsidered for publication. Can I please encourage you to focus in particular on the concerns of R2.
R1 feels the manuscript has been substantially improved but would like to see the new Figures S1 and S2 in the main text rather than supplementary material. I think this suggestion is constructive and hope you will consider it. They also raised a couple of additional minor points that should be addressed.
AR by Tracy Rankin on behalf of the Authors (29 May 2022) Author's response Author's tracked changes Manuscript
ED: Referee Nomination & Report Request started (30 May 2022) by Martin De Kauwe
RR by Anonymous Referee #1 (14 Jun 2022)
The manuscript reads well and my concerns on previous versions have been addressed. I did notice that while the legend on Figures 6 and 7 now include separate symbols for high water table and low water table in 2018, the low water table symbol (blue diamond) does not appear in panels g, h, and i of Figure 6 and does not appear at all in Figure 7. This seems like a mistake in the plots because low water table is defined as below 35 cm and water tables below that level do appear in Figure 7 but are marked with blue circles instead of diamonds.
Also, Figure 3 has a "Plot Area" box on it that appears to be an artifact from the plotting program.
ED: Publish subject to technical corrections (14 Jun 2022) by Martin De Kauwe
I am pleased to recommend publication subject to two minor technical corrections that the Reviewer has noted, please could you address this in your revised manuscript (see below).
"The manuscript reads well and my concerns on previous versions have been addressed. I did notice that while the legend on Figures 6 and 7 now include separate symbols for high water table and low water table in 2018, the low water table symbol (blue diamond) does not appear in panels g, h, and i of Figure 6 and does not appear at all in Figure 7. This seems like a mistake in the plots because low water table is defined as below 35 cm and water tables below that level do appear in Figure 7 but are marked with blue circles instead of diamonds.
Also, Figure 3 has a "Plot Area" box on it that appears to be an artifact from the plotting program."
AR by Tracy Rankin on behalf of the Authors (21 Jun 2022) Author's response Manuscript
Please provide a reason why you see this comment as being abusive.
You might include your name and email but you can also stay anonymous.
Please confirm reCaptcha.
Peatland respiration is made up of plant and peat sources. How to separate these sources is not well known as peat respiration is not straightforward and is more influenced by vegetation dynamics than previously thought. Results of plot level measurements from shrubs and sparse grasses in a woody bog show that plants' respiration response to changes in climate is related to their different root structures, implying a difference in the mechanisms by which they obtain water resources.
Peatland respiration is made up of plant and peat sources. How to separate these sources is not...


Review VRC's work over the years, and learn about the ongoing pursuits that guide our upcoming work. Also visit Completed Projects for more information about each project. For current newsletters, please subscribe.


text:
Announcements, Immigration | October 5, 2018
AG Becerra Issues Guidance and Model Policies on Immigrant Access to Public Facilities
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra recently issued guidance and model policies to ensure that facilities throughout the state remain accessible to all California residents. Pursuant to SB 54 (Chapter 495, Statutes of 2017), the California Attorney General was required to consult appropriate stakeholders and publish model policies limiting assistance with immigration enforcement to the fullest extent possible consistent with federal and state law at health facilities operated by a state or political subdivision of the state, public schools, public libraries, courthouses, Division of Labor Standards Enforcement facilities, the Agricultural Relations Board, the Division of Workers Compensation, and others.
CHEAC participated in a stakeholder meeting at the California Attorney General's Office with other applicable entities and organizations to provide input on the development of the publication, "Promoting Safe and Secure Healthcare Access for All." Additional publications related to access of other public facilities are accessible on the Attorney General's website here.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Cabinet facts and speculation
See my final cabinet speculation here
Tomorrow, Prime Minister Stephen Harper will name his new cabinet at Rideau Hall at 10:30am. There is a lot of speculation flowing out there and from this, I've been able to discern a few facts.
First, the easy facts: cabinet will be larger and have more women. Stephen Harper was returned to 24 Sussex on October 14th with an increased minority. Among the new seats gained by the Tories include a number of well-qualified women.
Second, Jim Flaherty stays in finance. In a time of global economic uncertainty, and after an election fought on stability in these times, changing the minister of finance could be seen as a bad signal to the world.
A few speculated that Helena Guergis may be retiring to the backbench. However, Guergis has told her junior ministerial staff that they'll be employed in her office for at least the short-term future. I've also heard that Guergis is moving portfolios. Josee Verner is also moving portfolios.
Environment minister John Baird will also be moving portfolios now that green leader of the opposition Stephane Dion is stepping down. Baird was the go-to guy for acting as a shield for the government on tricky portfolios. He'll move on to new responsibilities in cabinet.
As of Friday night, when most cabinet hopefuls had received their calls from the PM invited them to serve in the new cabinet, Maxime Bernier was left waiting. A few speculated that he'd return to cabinet, however, it seems that he'll have some more time in the penalty box.
The newly minted Member of Parliament from Nunavut Leona Aglukkaq will serve in the next cabinet. Stephen Harper personally recruited the former territorial minister and has made northern sovereignty a defining issue of his Prime Ministership. Aglukkaq would be the first female Inuit to serve in federal cabinet. It is expected that she'll become responsible for the new opportunities agency for the north.
Speculative news that I'm hearing is that Trade will be shifted from Foreign Affairs to Industry and that the Minister of Industry would also assume duties for this portfolio. Or, alternatively, trade will be under Industry bur will have a separate minister. The last election saw the defeat of Harper's trade minister and a failure to re-offer by his foreign affairs minister.
On foreign affairs, I'm hearing that Lawrence Cannon will herd the cats at DFAIT. A french-speaking and centrist Conservative, Cannon may be Harper's choice to head that portfolio.
In departmental news, I'm hearing that Transport and Infrastructure will be broken into two. Rookie MP Lisa Raitt may be a perfect fit for a reduced transport portfolio, while a Toronto area minister such as Peter Kent may fit the bill to shower the region with infrastructure development money. UPDATE: A bureaucrat that has seen the briefing books for Transport's next minister says that infrastructure is still part of Transport's mandate.
Will there be another Liberal defection to cabinet? I'm hearing yes and that it'll be from Quebec (I'd categorize this as speculative even though my high level source seemed to be certain). After the last election Vancouver MP David Emerson jumped from the Liberal ranks to sit as a Conservative cabinet minister. With a Liberal party in ruin, we may just see one or more defections tomorrow.
UPDATE: Tony Clement is now confirmed as moving from the Ministry of Health.
UPDATE: Jim Prentice is expected to stay at Industry.
UPDATE: I'm hearing that Verner is going to intergovernmental affairs.
UPDATE: Late breaking speculative gossip: Ambrose to HRSDC?
UPDATE: Hill from Whip to House Leader?
Posted on October 29, 2008 Author Stephen TaylorCategories OtherTags cabinet, david emerson, floor crossing, Foreign Affairs, health, helena guergis, house leader, hrsdc, industry, infrastructure, intergovernmental affairs, jay hill, jim flaherty, jim prentice, john baird, josee verner, lawrence cannon, leona aglukkaq, lisa raitt, maxime bernier, peter kent, rona ambrose, tony clement, Trade, transport, whip
Previous Previous post: Liberal leadership race heats up
Next Next post: Final cabinet speculation


text:
Myanmar President Thein Sein congratulates Aung San Suu Kyi, vows stable transition
Myanmar President Thein Sein congratulated democratic champion Aung San Suu Kyi on Wednesday (Nov 11). PHOTO: AFP
https://str.sg/UgHx
YANGON (Reuters) - Myanmar President Thein Sein congratulated democratic champion Aung San Suu Kyi on Wednesday (Nov 11), as her party appeared to have trounced the ruling camp in the first free election in 25 years and inched towards an absolute majority in parliament.
Mr Thein Sein reiterated that the government would accept the results of the election and agreed to Ms Suu Kyi's request to hold reconciliation talks soon, although the two are still to agree on the time and location of the negotiations.
"Congratulations ... to the chairperson Aung San Suu Kyi and her party for gathering the support of the people," read a statement posted on the Facebook page of the presidential spokesman.
"The government will respect and follow the people's choice and decision, and work on transferring power peacefully according to the timetable," said the statement, adding that the president would work with "all other people" to ensure stability in the post-election period.
Ms Suu Kyi has also invited the powerful army chief to hold reconcilitation talks, but he has yet to respond to the letter.
Ms Suu Kyi's opposition National League for Democracy (NLD) has won over 80 per cent of the seats declared so far in the Lower House and is well ahead in the Upper House and regional assemblies.
If the final results confirm the trend, Ms Suu Kyi's triumph will sweep out an old guard of former generals that has run Myanmar since the junta handed over power to Mr Thein Sein's semi-civilian government in 2011.
The armed forces continue to wield considerable power in Myanmar's political institutions, under a Constitution drafted before the end of nearly 50 years of rule. It is unclear how Ms Suu Kyi and the generals will work together.
"It is very important for the dignity of the country and to bring peace of mind to the people," Ms Suu Kyi said in the letter.
Relations between Ms Suu Kyi and armed forces chief Min Aung Hlaing are said to be strained.
One of the biggest sources of tension between Ms Suu Kyi and the military is a clause in the Constitution barring her from the presidency because her children are foreign nationals.
Few doubt the military inserted the clause to rule her out.
While her letters seek conciliation, Ms Suu Kyi has become increasingly defiant on the presidential clause as the scale of her victory has become apparent.
She has made it clear she will run the country regardless of who the NLD elects as president and described the constitution as "very silly".
"We'll find one," she told the BBC in an interview on Tuesday, referring to her choice of president. "But that won't stop me from making all the decisions as the leader of the winning party."
Results so far gave Ms Suu Kyi's party 179 of 216 seats declared out of the 330 seats not allocated to the military in the Lower House.
Under the junta-crafted Constitution, a quarter of the seats in both chambers are unelected and reserved for the armed forces.
To form Myanmar's first democratically elected government since the early 1960s, the NLD needs to win more than two-thirds of seats that were contested in Parliament.
The NLD has said it is on course for over 250 seats in the Lower House, well above the 221 needed to control the chamber. Reuters was not able to independently verify the party's estimates of its own performance.
The ruling Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP), created by the junta and led by retired soldiers, has conceded defeat in a poll that was a major milestone on Myanmar's rocky path from dictatorship to democracy.
In addition to his bloc of parliament seats, the commander-in-chief nominates the heads of three powerful and big-budget ministries - interior, defence and border security.
The Interior Ministry gives him control of the pervasive bureaucracy, which could pose a significant obstacle to the NLD's ability to execute policy.
Among other formidable challenges for Ms Suu Kyi is trying to put an end to decades of conflict with armed ethnic groups.
Mr Thein Sein failed to do that despite protracted talks that led to a ceasefire with some groups. The government's chief ceasefire negotiator Aung Min was among the heavyweight politicians that lost in the elections.
Sunday's vote was Myanmar's first freely contested general election since Mr Thein Sein ushered in a period of reforms that prompted a partial lifting of international sanctions.
Money from abroad flowed in quickly afterward. Foreign direct investment stood at US$8 billion (S$11.3 billion) in fiscal year 2014/15, more than five times the flows recorded just two years earlier.
Washington welcomed the election as a victory for Myanmar's people, but said it would watch how the democratic process moved forward before lifting the remaining U.S. sanctions.
Final results are due no later than two weeks after Sunday's poll.
MYANMAR ELECTION 2015
THEIN SEIN


Good reading for bushwalkers. WalkGPS.
"Wild" – Magazine published quarterly.
"AG (Australia Geographic) Outdoor" – Magazine published every 2 months.
"Great Walks" – Magazine published every 2 months.
"Landscope" – DBCA's quarterly magazine produced from June 1985 onward, with general interest articles on conservation, forests, and wildlife in Western Australia. (ISSN 0815-4465).
Lotsafreshair – Lots of good online tips for bushwalkers.
"The Ways of the Bushwalker: on foot in Australia", Melissa Harper, 2007. (ISBN 978 086840 968 9). – A fascinating read on the origins and history of 'bushwalking' which shows how this activity has become the most popular way for Australians to engage with the bush.


To repeal the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and health care-related provisions in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010.
This bill was introduced in a previous session of Congress and was passed by the House on July 11, 2012 but was never passed by the Senate.
This activity took place on a related bill, H.Res. 724 (112th).
H.R. 6079 (112th) was a bill in the United States Congress.
Repeal of Obamacare Act, H.R. 6079, 112th Cong. (2012).


text:
Violett Beane Breaking News, Photos, and Videos
Main > Violett Beane
Tue, 14 May 2019
Julianne Hough, Josh Dallas & More TV Stars Celebrate Upfronts at 'EW' & 'People' Party!
Julianne Hough strikes a pose on the carpet as she arrives at Entertainment Weekly & People's Upfronts Party on Monday night (May 13) in New York City.
The 30-year-old America's Got Talent judge was joined at the event by Manifest's Josh Dallas and Melissa Roxburgh, New Amsterdam's Ryan Eggold, Janet Montgomery, Margot Bingham, Freema Agyeman and Jocko Sims, Good Girls' Retta, SNL's Kenan Thompson, Taran Killam of Single Parents, Zoey's Extraordinary Playlist's Skylar Astin and Jane Levy, and Brooklyn Nine-Nine's Melissa Fumero, Terry Crews and Stephanie Beatriz.
Also in attendance to represent their shows were Indebted's Fran Drescher, Adam Pally, Jessy Hodges and Abby Elliott, Snowpiercer's Alison Wright, Lincoln's Michael Imperioli, Arielle Kebbel and Russell Hornsby, Watchmen's Adelaide Clemens, The Good Fight's Mike Colter, Four Weddings and a Funeral's Rebecca Rittenhouse and Sophia La Porta, Amir Arison of The Blacklist, Chicago Med's Yaya DaCosta, Tom Payne of Prodigal Son, Katy Keene's Jonny Beauchamp, Aly & AJ Michalka, Station 19's Jaina Lee Ortiz, Danielle Savre and Barrett Doss, A Million Little Things' Allison Miller, Stephanie Szostak, James Roday and Christina Moses, Donald Faison of Emergence, Roselyn Sanchez of Grand Hotel, Nancy Drew's Kennedy McMann, Nicole Kang of Batwoman, Violett Beane of God Friended Me, and Ester Dean.
FYI: Kennedy is wearing a Markarian dress. Julianne is wearing a Vatanika top and dress. Stephanie is wearing Les Petits Jouerus shoes.
Posted to 2019 Upfronts Week, Abby Elliott, Adam Pally, Adelaide Clemens, AJ Michalka, Alison Wright, Allison Miller, Aly Michalka, Amir Arison, Arielle Kebbel, Barrett Doss, Christina Moses, Danielle Savre, Donald Faison, Ester Dean, Fran Drescher, Freema Agyeman, Jaina Lee Ortiz, James Roday, Jane Levy, Janet Montgomery, Jessy Hodges, Jocko Sims, Jonny Beauchamp, Josh Dallas, Julianne Hough, Kenan Thompson, Kennedy McMann, Margot Bingham, Melissa Fumero, Melissa Roxburgh, michael imperioli, Mike Colter, Nicole Kang, Rebecca Rittenhouse, Retta, Roselyn Sanchez, Russell Hornsby, Ryan Eggold, Skylar Astin, Sophia La Porta, Stephanie Beatriz, Stephanie Szostak, Taran Killam, Terry Crews, Tom Payne, Violett Beane, Yaya DaCosta
Credit: Dimitrios Kambouris, Larry Busacca; Photos: Getty
Tue, 20 November 2018
Ben McKenzie & Morena Baccarin Couple Up at International Emmy Awards
Ben McKenzie and Morena Baccarin were a cute couple at the 2018 International Emmy Awards!
The duo hit the red carpet at the annual award ceremony on Monday (November 19) at the
New York Hilton in New York City.
PHOTOS: Check out the latest pics of Ben McKenzie
They were also joined at the event by Sullivan Stapleton, Dana Delaney, Greg Berlanti, Violett Beane, Tony Shalhoub, Connie Nielsen and Erich Bergen.
During the show, Sullivan presented the coveted International Emmy Founders Award to Greg for his creative contributions to the quality of global television production.
FYI: Morena is wearing David Webb jewelry. Violett is wearing a Black Halo dress.
10+ pictures inside from the International Emmy Awards…
More Here! »
Posted to Benjamin McKenzie, Connie Nielsen, Dana Delaney, Erich Bergen, Greg Berlanti, Morena Baccarin, Sullivan Stapleton, Tony Shalhoub, Violett Beane
Photos: Getty
Sun, 28 October 2018
Kate & Rooney Mara Step Out for Animal Equality's Inspiring Global Action Gala
Kate Mara is joined by younger sister Rooney as they hit the black carpet at the 2018 Animal Equality's Inspiring Global Action LA Gala on Saturday night (October 27) at the Beverly Hilton Hotel in Beverly Hills, Calif.
The sister looked pretty in a coordinating black and white outfits as they stepped out for the event.
PHOTOS: Check out the latest pics of Rooney Mara
Other stars at the event included Evanna Lynch, Harley Quinn Smith, Daniella Monet, a very husband Kat Von D and husband Leafar Seyer, and Violett Beane.
FYI: Violett is wearing a Reformation dress. Rooney & Kate are both wearing outfits by Hiraeth.
20+ pictures inside of the stars at the event…More Here! »
Posted to daniella monet, Evanna Lynch, Harley Quinn Smith, Kat Von D, Kate Mara, Leafar Seyer, Pregnant Celebrities, Rooney Mara, Violett Beane
Sun, 09 September 2018
Nikki Reed & Ian Somerhalder Sit Front Row at Escada Fashion Show
Nikki Reed and Ian Somerhalder sit front row at the Escada fashion show during 2018 New York Fashion Week on Sunday (September 9) in New York City.
Also seen at the show that afternoon were Westworld's Angela Sarafyan and actress Kate Bosworth, along with Amber Valletta, Skai Jackson, Derek Blasberg, Olivia Palermo, Wendi Deng Murdoch, God Friended Me's Violett Beane and more.
PHOTOS: Check out the latest pics of Nikki Reed
Joan Smalls was seen walking the runway in the show as well!
FYI: Skai is carrying a Ming Ray clutch.
Check out all the photos from the New York Fashion Week show in the gallery…
Posted to 2018 New York Fashion Week September, Amber Valletta, Angela Sarafyan, Derek Blasberg, Ian Somerhalder, Joan Smalls, Kate Bosworth, Nikki Reed, Olivia Palermo, Skai Jackson, Violett Beane, Wendi Deng Murdoch
Brandon Micheal Hall Brings 'God Friended Me' To CBS Upfronts 2018!
Brandon Micheal Hall is all smiles on the blue carpet as he arrives at the 2018 CBS Upfronts on Wednesday (May 16) at the Plaza Hotel in New York City.
The actor was joined at the event by co-stars Joe Morton, Violett Beane, Suraj Sharma, and Javicia Leslie as they promoted their new show God Friended Me at the press event.
PHOTOS: Check out the latest pics of Brandon Micheal Hall
Here's the synopsis: "Questions of faith, existence and science are explored in this humorous, uplifting series about an outspoken atheist (Brandon) whose life is turned upside down when he is 'friended' by God on social media. Unwittingly, he becomes an agent of change in the lives and destinies of others around him," Deadline reports.
God Friended Me will premiere this fall on CBS.
Watch the trailer below!
15+ pictures inside of the cast at the event…More Here! »
Posted to 2018 Upfronts, Brandon Micheal Hall, Javicia Leslie, Joe Morton, Suraj Sharma, Violett Beane
Photos: Kristina Bumphrey for StarPix
Fri, 13 April 2018
Lucy Hale Goes Gothic at 'Truth or Dare' Premiere with Tyler Posey
Lucy Hale meets up with co-star Tyler Posey at the premiere of their new movie Blumhouse's Truth or Dare on Thursday (April 12) at ArcLight Cinerama Dome in Hollywood.
The actors were joined by their co-stars Violett Beane, Sophia Taylor Ali (who is dating Tyler in real life), Landon Liboiron, Nolan Gerard Funk, Sam Lerner, Brady Smith, Hayden Szeto, Morgan Lindholm, Aurora Perrineau, and Tom Choi.
The film's producer Jason Blum, who has become one of the most recognizable and successful names in the horror world, was also there!
Also pictured inside: Lucy and Tyler at a screening of the movie the night before at the Estrella Screening Room in West Hollywood.
FYI: Lucy is wearing a Monique Lhuillier gown at the premiere. Tyler is wearing a Perry Ellis suit at the premiere. Sam is wearing a Hugo Boss suit, They shoes, a Cos shirt, and an Omega watch. Violett is wearing Sam Edelman shoes.
Posted to Aurora Perrineau, Brady Smith, Hayden Szeto, Jason Blum, Landon Liboiron, Lucy Hale, Morgan Lindholm, Nolan Gerard Funk, sam lerner, Sophia Taylor Ali, Tom Choi, Tyler Posey, Violett Beane
Photos: Getty, Frances Iacuzzi Photography
Thu, 04 January 2018
Lucy Hale & Tyler Posey's 'Truth or Dare' Gets Scary First Trailer - Watch Now!
Check out the first trailer for Lucy Hale and Tyler Posey in Blumhouse's Truth or Dare!
Violett Beane, Nolan Gerard Funk, Hayden Szeto and Sophia Taylor Ali co-star in the supernatural thriller.
In the flick, a group of friends start playing a harmless game of "Truth or Dare," but it turns deadly very very instantly. While playing, someone-or something-begins to punish those who tell a lie-or refuse the dare.
Truth or Dare is set to hit theaters on April 13, 2018.
Watch the brand new trailer for the film below…
Posted to Hayden Szeto, Lucy Hale, Movies, Nolan Gerard Funk, Sophia Taylor Ali, Trailer, Tyler Posey, Violett Beane
Photos: Universal


Deciding on the best garage door company is vital. There are multiple reasons to need a professional when addressing everything garage door specific.
Garage doors are massive and dangerous. You have to depend on an expert to handle all installation and repair work for your safety and security. In addition, there are a bunch of options when it pertains to investing in a new garage door. With numerous garage doors available these days, it can be relatively challenging to select one, especially if you've never had to look around for a new door previously. Do not know exactly where to start?
We have successfully set high standards of premium quality, trustworthiness in our products and our professional services. We retain an incredibly high level of performance right now as when we initially opened our doors.
The crew at The Garage Door Repair Man has supplied our patrons in Benbrook, with garage door support services for many years, and we understand how significant these garage door installation and servicing is.
We pride ourselves on expertly meeting all your garage door goals; we offer support and suggestions that show what is best for you, your household and your house. Our approach has kept us going strong for many years. We really want our customers to rely on us for all their garage door requirements. We welcome any sort of opportunities to serve all of our client's needs, day or night, 365 days a year. We are the absolute best garage door company as a result of our wonderful team of expert professional garage door installers.
Here at The Garage Door Repair Man, we provide support services day and night, twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Our skilled and trained specialists are educated and certified to offer top-level services to our clients.
When it comes to garage doors, The Garage Door Repair Man is the absolute most trusted name in Benbrook. Our clients in Benbrook look to us because our service specialists have decades of qualified experience in the garage door profession. We always go out of our way to make our clients thrilled and completely content.
Our experts consider it a privilege to get welcomed into our customer's residences for their garage door wants. We deliver top quality services every single time. Check out at what a couple of our pleased clients have to say.
I am so happy with our brand-new garage door. These experts came out and had our brand new garage door set up swiftly and easily. With exceptional prices and professional service, I am overjoyed with our choice!
Our garage door broke late in the evening. We phoned business, and they came out immediately to have a look. They repaired our trouble very quickly. We are extremely satisfied with the services of your company. Thanks once again!
Have you been requiring garage door repair? If you have, you will need to make sure to ask various inquiries to a possible company prior to hiring them. In this article, we will discuss some of the major questions that you will want to ask a possible company before you make your hiring decision.
Experience is vital when it comes to discovering the right repair company. You would like to identify a company that provides extensive experience in the industry. Getting a company with a significant amount of experience is a terrific way to maximize the chances that you can for top level repair work completed. A highly skilled company will probably offer you a much greater opportunity to find the sort of work that you just expect.
Another big thing that you want to ask a possible company is whether or not they may have the right type of insurance that is needed to work on your property without putting you at unnecessary risk. If they hold the appropriate insurance, you are not going to be accountable for a thing that fails or maybe among their employees gets hurt while at work.
Another thing that you are going to would like to ask is what sort of pricing they have. As you never desire to solely base your hiring decision off of the price that they can will be charging, you need to do want to actually are receiving the best price to the service. You can do a complete comparison with all the other garage door repair companies to actually are obtaining a fair offer.
You will be able to figure lots of this out yourself. Nowadays, you are able to complete basic searches which will offer you a great deal of knowledge that you can base your decisions off of. However, by asking the company for specific testimonials that they have, you should be able to tell whether they have lots of satisfied clients. Also, once they present you with testimonials and references, you will be able get in touch with these to ask any further questions you may have.
Another big thing that you will would like to ask in order to make the best possible hiring decision will be whether they are going to provide you any sort of guarantees that you will be able to depend on. You would like to look for a firm that is confident enough within their service they are going to provide you with some form of service guarantee. Like that, it will be easy being as confident as possible that you will be getting what you will be purchasing. Developing a guarantee is a terrific way to get the reassurance that you could have to make the best possible hiring decision.
By following most of the tips above and asking the questions discussed, you should be able to put yourself in a fantastic position to distinguish the most effective garage door repair company you need to be hiring. You want to ask the proper questions with regards to finding the right garage door repair company. Stay away from using pricing as the primary methods of navigating the marketplace. You need to look at the value you will get for the investment you may be spending on the service.
When you think of garage door repair near me in Benbrook, think of The Garage Door Repair Man.


Icebergs and sheep! A strange combination even for New Zealand, renowned for its woolly quadrupeds. This footage results from two rather unusual events.
In November 2006, icebergs were sighted 60 kilometres off the Dunedin coast, on the eastern side of New Zealand. This was a rare enough event in itself. It was thought that the parent of these icebergs had broken off the Ronne Ice Shelf in Antarctica six years previously and was disintegrating as it was carried by ocean currents far from home. Although visible from the hills around Dunedin to the naked eye, binoculars were better. But NHNZ staff decided to take to the air for an even better look. And some stunning shots resulted.
Shrek, a merino sheep who shot to "stardom" nearly three years earlier, celebrated his tenth birthday with another blade shearing in 2007 on an iceberg 90 kilometres off the Dunedin coast. Shrek first lost his fleece for charity in 2004, amidst huge media attention. He had evaded detection in the Central Otago high country for six years and when shorn, produced a fleece weighing an amazing 25 kilograms. The shearing on the iceberg was no less dramatic, though the drama was prompted more by a huge chunk breaking off the iceberg just as shearing got under way.
Looking for footage of a sheep in a helicopter? HD Footage of the icebergs, and Shrek shearing, are available from NHNZ Moving Images. Contact Jamie or Olly on library@nhnz.tv.
Forty percent of the net of sales of the Shrek footage goes to "Cure Kids". "Cure Kids" is an organisation established over 30 years ago to address the lack of research into life-threatening childhood illnesses in New Zealand.
Check out other interesting, intriguing and arresting images from the NHNZ stockshot library.


text:
Can James Alefantis Sue Alex Jones And Infowars Over Pizzagate?
After enduring defamation leading to a dangerous situation, is there a legal remedy? Maybe.
By A.H. Neff
Well, this is interesting. Alex Jones - founder and face of Infowars - has "apologized" on air and in a writtten statement to James Alefantis, owner of Comet Ping Pong, the D.C. restaurant falsely implicated in the "Pizzagate" hoax.
I won't dignify the Pizzagate story with a description here. It's gross and absurd and false, so, if you must read about it, you can find it here. It is still alive today in some circles.
Instead, as I have in prior columns here at C&L, I want to focus on what Mr. Alefantis could do to make himself whole in the aftermath of Pizzagate. And make no mistake: he has been injured. Mr. Alefantis and his business were defamed; his workers and customers at Comet Ping Pong were physically endangered when a man with a gun - aroused by reports about the fake Pizzagate stories - fired into the restaurant.
There are a few interesting aspects to Jones's on-air "apology." They relate to Alefantis's ability to sue Jones - more specifically, in what capacity Alefantis might sue Jones, and whether he might win a suit.
First, Jones's "apology" - written by his lawyers, unless I'm an incompetent analyst of text and syntax - paints Mr. Alefantis as a "public figure." Early in Jones's statement, he refers to Alefantis as "...a prominent individual who has been mentioned as a power player in Washington."
This is entirely tactical. If Mr. Alefantis were to sue Infowars and Jones - and any of the other promoters of the Pizzagate canard, the defendants are less vulnerable if Alefantis is classified legally as a "public figure." He'd fall into one of the categories of defamation-targets who have to meet a higher standard of proof than the ordinary private citizen. Instead of proving merely negligent or intentional defamation, Alefantis would have to prove that his defamers acted with "actual malice" - publishing false allegations while knowing their falsity or publishing them in reckless disregard of their falsity.
Unfortunately for Mr. Alefantis, it appears he might be classified as a "public figure." He was not unknown to the general public before the Pizzagate hoax surfaced: for example, GQ named him as one of the 50 most powerful people in Washington D.C. in 2012. In this first respect, therefore, it seems possible that it might be harder rather than easier for Alefantis to sue Jones successfully for defamation.
Second, it appears that Jones might be using his "apology" to attempt to trivialize his slurs as merely a mildly stated opinion that further investigation of Alefantis was warranted:
The volume of stories was substantial, generating national headlines and came to be known across the country as "Pizzagate." We at Infowars became part of that national discussion. We broadcast commentary about the allegations and the theory that the emails contained code words. We raised questions about information in Mr. Podesta's emails and the Comet Ping Pong restaurant. We believed at the time that further investigation was necessary.
This appears to be an attempt to characterize whatever garbage Infowars published as this: "We at Infowars didn't believe or know or assert that Alefantis was trafficking children for sex, but, golly, we just thought an investigation was necessary."
In other words, according to Jones, there's "raising questions" and "RAISING QUESTIONS!!!!!!!" Jones wants to call his the lower case-case kind of questions.
I suppose here that Jones and Infowars are trying to distance themselves from the allegations, but that might be legally pointless and provably laughable.
The allegations were all over Infowars's website and associated media for months - as Jones tells his viewers, listeners, and readers in his statement (perhaps unwisely, given that the statement would be introduced in trial as evidence of the expansive and repeated extent of Infowars's broadcasting the defamation):
In late February of 2017, we received a letter from Mr. Alefantis asking that we retract certain statements that he says were made in seven of our broadcasts between the last week of November and the first week of December in 2016….
Months ago, we took down the majority of broadcasts and videos including ones that only passingly mentioned Pizzagate. This happened months before we were even contacted by Mr. Alefantis. Mr. Alefantis objected to portions of seven particular radio/TV broadcasts. We have taken down those seven broadcasts and we have attempted to take down any broadcasts that mentioned Mr. Alefantis or Comet Ping Pong. We have attempted to do so not just on our website but also on social media sites such as our YouTube channel.
Unfortunately for Jones and Infowars, I don't think they'd easily convince a jury that their interest in Pizzagate was minimal and transitory. And it doesn't appear that they've successfully scrubbed Infowars's platforms: "...we have attempted..." appears twice in that last paragraph.
Even before a lawsuit, I would think that Mr. Alefantis's lawyers would try to calculate just how many times Infowars broadcast stories about the Pizzagate hoax, identify all the links and multiple platform appearances on Infowars of the hoax, estimate how many clicks Infowars might have gotten for them, and - importantly - find any remaining Pizzgate slurs on Infowars's virtual landscape.
And, if Mr. Alefantis did file suit, I expect his lawyers would subpoena the former Infowars "reporters" who wrote the Pizzagate stories. His lawyers would depose them to find out what kind of editorial supervision and direction they had when they researched and wrote their Pizzagate stories - if any. It's going to be difficult for Jones and Infowars to contend credibly that they ever-so-lightly touched on this topic before moving quickly on to other matters.
Third, you might have noticed that every time I've used a variant of "apology" here, I've put it in quotes. That's because Jones can't quite bring himself to simply apologize and move on. He apologizes and then un-apologizes. For legal reasons, he must.
Jones starts here:
In our commentary about what had become known as Pizzagate, I made comments about Mr. Alefantis that in hindsight I regret, and for which I apologize to him.
Well done, Mr. Jones! Very gracious! Case closed!
But wait, there's more! In the vein of not-really-apologizing, Jones continues.
We were participating in a discussion that was being written about by scores of media outlets, in one of the most hotly contested and disputed political environments our country has ever seen. We relied on third-party accounts of alleged activities and conduct at the restaurant. We also relied on accounts of reporters who are no longer with us. This was an ever-evolving story, which had a huge amount of commentary about it across many, many media outlets.
As I have said before, what became a heightened focus on Mr. Alefantis and Comet Ping Pong by many media outlets was not appropriate. To my knowledge today, neither Mr. Alefantis, nor his restaurant Comet Ping Pong, were involved in any human trafficking as was part of the theories about Pizzagate that were being written about in the media outlets and which we commented upon.
I want our viewers and listeners to know that we regret any negative impact our commentaries may have had on Mr. Alefantis, Comet Ping Pong, or its employees. We apologize to the extent our commentaries could be considered as negative statements about Mr. Alefantis or Comet Ping Pong, and we hope that anyone else involved in commenting on Pizzagate will do the same thing.
After starting out with what might almost amount to a simple apology ("I made comments about Mr. Alefantis that in hindsight I regret, and for which I apologize to him.") Jones winds up in Nopology-City: "We apologize to the extent our commentaries could be considered as negative statements…"
This, too, is tactical. It can be read in conjunction with this later part of Jones's statement: "In issuing this statement, we are not admitting that Mr. Alefantis, or his restaurants, have any legal claim. We do not believe they do."
In other words, Jones is saying only that "We're sorry if anyone misconstrued our entirely innocent statements of opinion as defamation, and, by the way, no one suffered any legally compensable injury as a result of our mere opinions."
Of course, Jones has to say this. If he wants to avoid writing a check to Mr. Alefantis, Jones can't admit that Alefantis suffered any injury to his reputation.
In my last column here, I suggested that our former President might have a legally cognizable basis to sue Breitbart for defaming him concerning baseless allegations from the Current Occupant (White House) about wiretapping.
I believe that is true here - perhaps more so. Unlike President Obama, Mr. Alefantis, while arguably prominent in D.C., is essentially an innocent private bystander and collateral damage in the right-wing War on Fact. His customers might have been injured or killed by a gunman animated by the Pizzagate stories.
And, while I ardently support protection of our free press and free speech, I also believe we'd all be better off if we actually did drain one specific swamp - the right-wing media-bog - or at least got them to abide by conventional journalistic principles of research, editing, and reporting. And, in turn, this might create fewer opportunities for politicians and spokesmen to evade responsibility for peddling and profiting from this garbage by saying, "Well, I'm merely repeating what I read in that fine online publication!"
That's why our system of laws allows defamation lawsuits, even in light of our First Amendment. Defamation lawsuits can deter defamation.
If the right-wing media and their meat-puppet politicians want to operate a reputational wrecking ball in the public square, they better have a permit and they better operate within legally acceptable limits. When they don't, when they injure private citizens' reputations and physically endanger the public by broadcasting inflammatory garbage, and whether they're driven by ideology, delusion, click-greed or any combination, they should suffer the consequences. And they should be painful.
Alex Jones, defamation, James Alefantis, Pizzagate
'Infowars' Pizza Parlor Shooter Gets Four Years
No, Hillary Clinton did not run a child sex ring out of the basement of a pizza parlor that has no basement. And no child sex ring.
Falsehoods, Sandy Hook And Suing Alex Jones
Sandy Hook parents were harassed online and in person as "hoaxers" and "crisis actors" by members of Jones' audience.
Gunman At DC Pizza Parlor Was 'Investigating' Right-Wing Conspiracy 'Pizzagate' Lie
Edgar Maddison Welch followed Alex Jones and National Security Advisor-to-be Michael Flynn's lead right down a rabbit hole.
By Karoli Kuns
Hillary Clinton On Fake News: 'Real Lives Are At Stake'
And "Fake News" Pushback, led by Infowars, is Hypocritical and Evil
Alex Jones Wants Sandy Hook Families' Addresses Made Public In Court
Alex Jones is a sick awful person, but you knew that.
Sandy Hook Families Suing Alex Jones For Defamation
Words. Have. Consequences.


Sending money is easier and faster than ever.
When you use Online Banking or our mobile app, you have access to Popmoney – for free!
Don't worry about writing a check or carrying cash to pay someone. You can send money directly from your Online Banking account or through our mobile app to practically anyone. Unlike other money-transfer services, Popmoney has the added ease and security of being inside your password-protected online account. Fees may apply.
You can import your contacts or enter the recipient's information (name, email address, and/or cellphone number) and the dollar amount you want to send.
An email or text message is sent automatically to the recipient notifying them of the funds.
The recipient logs in to their Popmoney account (through their financial institution or they can set up a Popmoney account for free) to receive the money.
Log in to your GECU Online Banking.
Hover over the Move Money tab.
Click Pay Other People (Popmoney).
Open the GECU mobile app.
Tap More. (Android users, first tap the menu icon).
That's it! The money is deposited directly into the account of the recipient. If you want to send money to the same person again, you simply select their name, enter the amount, and click send.
It's quick, secure, and easy to use.
Track transactions through your recent activity.
Personalize your payments with messages.
Request money from a person or group.
Import contacts from your phone contact list or popular email services (such as Hotmail®, Yahoo!®, and Gmail®).
A federal regulation limits the number of transfers that may be made from a share/savings or money market account. Please see our Truth In Savings for details. A supported mobile device is needed to use our mobile app. Standard message and data rates may apply.
By text, email, or directly to their bank account – pay people with Popmoney.


ADVANTAGE: The online tutoring idea allows for a lower transaction cost (figuratively, not literally) than real-life tutoring.
The fact that online-tutoring is much more anonymous is a huge advantage.
DISADVANTAGE: Person to Person communication with people is VERY limited online.
Currently, our technology limits us to very simple means of communication: text, images, virtual "whiteboards," etc. The richer means of communication are waiting on the heels of technology. In real-life, person to person communication is MUCH richer. Obviously, being tutored step-by-step through a complicated calculus problem would be MUCH easier in real life: hand gestures, voice (tone of voice IMPORTANT), free-hand writing (look at the math newsgroups to see how, using the limited characters (tools) they have, they express math problems).
This online-tutoring idea NEEDS to leverage the value of the network. I don't see how this will be achieved. One idea is to have a LIMITED BACK-END POOL of people. These people will be the paid "tutors," helping out the students. This limitation exists in real-life as well. If I want to be tutored at UCLA, I'm limited to those UCLA students who choose to be tutors. Now, of course we're talking the Internet, and the LIMITED BACK-END POOL can be MUCH BIGGER (thousands of people from all over the world) and it can be MUCH MORE DIVERSE, but this limitation still exists. Ideally, this LIMITED BACK-END POOL would grow in proportion with demand for tutoring.
The biggest challenge I see in all of this, which, in my opinion, should be the FUNDAMENTAL advantage of online-tutoring is the "matching up" of problems and solutions. Ideally, if you have a problem, or need help with something, you would be helped instantly by an expert in the topic whom you can easily communicate with. So, let's assume we have a diverse BACK-END POOL of people. A student has a problem. How do we determine who the most "qualified" tutor is for a student? What if a student is matched up with someone whom with they just can't learn? What if another tutor is just plain and simply more "qualified" than a tutor that is currently serving a student? These problems exist in real-life, however they would be even bigger online. Online, the tutors would have much less knowledge of each other and each other's skills (unlike, for example, in a real-life tutoring center where the tutors can interact and communicate on a daily basis, and learn who is best suited for each task).
One idea would be to make the tutoring effort more collaborative, not simply a 1 to 1 ratio between students and tutors. Let's assume a student has a difficult geometry problem. He "posts" in a public, globally viewable place, his problem. Immediately, he is helped by the most qualified person. Tutors, having the ability to view "pending" problems they are interested in, can "join-in" the tutoring effort, and provide help if it is necessary.
Now, this idea clashes with the LIMITED BACK-END POOL model. However, maybe we can remove the LIMIT on the BACK-END by allowing anyone in the world to instantly become a "tutor." We could have "CERTIFIED" tutors (who are PAID for their work), and then just "CONTRIBUTORS" (who work on free will).
This idea would be REALLY harness the power of the Internet. Like newsgroups, there would be absolutely NO LIMIT on the BACK-END. However, unlike newsgroups, it could be organized, moderated, and real-time. Now thinking about it, I used to see it (and be part of it) on America Online (back in the days..)! AOL has a chat area where members can go if they have problems/questions. Each chat room is run/partially-moderated by a PAID AOL support staff member. AOL Members who join the chat room wait "in line" to be served by the AOL staff members. Because AOL was not capable, in certain situations, to support all of its members, some chat rooms did not have AOL support staff members. As a result, smart, experienced members would help each other.
Now thinking about this, I have a model in my head how this could all be put together. I see a web server primarily used to display "pending" problems (that students have). This information would be categorized, by subject, and of course, searchable. All "tutoring" could be done peer-to-peer, meaning that no real-load would be put on a SERVER (very decentralized). The real question is the environment in which the student and tutor will communicate. Ideally, they could use any internet-capable appliance in the world to communicate, so having the application non web-based (like ICQ) would not be good. However, making the application web-based would pose some real limitations as far as expandability. Maybe a Java app would be an option. Whatever model it is developed on, it should inherently lend itself to change in communications technology (video, voice, etc).


Thanks to PetPlan, our two 1-year-old chocolate labs - Beaux and Bella - are happy and healthy! After our veterinarian discovered a painful genetic disorder (OCD) and sent us to the Gulf Coast Surgical Hospital, we were expecting a huge financial burden. Due to the support and prompt response from PetPlan, we were able to pay for Beaux's shoulder surgery and Bella's knee surgery and ligament repair immediately. They are both enjoying the swimming pool in this summer heat and running around the yard as puppies should. Thank you, PetPlan!