MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6989636174

Blue carbon storage in the Cowichan Estuary, British Columbia

2021· dissertation· en· W6989636174 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria) · 2021
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineEnvironmental Science
ThématiqueCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamics
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBlue carbonCarbon sequestrationSalt marshEcosystemSeagrassHabitatCarbon cycleEstuaryEcosystem servicesAtmospheric carbon cycleCarbon fibers
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The capacity of the world’s coastal ecosystems to sequester carbon dioxide (CO2), termed “Blue Carbon,” has been a major focus of research in recent decades due to its potential to mitigate climate change. Vegetated coastal ecosystems such as mangroves, seagrass beds, and salt marshes represent a global area that is one to two orders of magnitude smaller than that of terrestrial forests, yet their contribution to long-term carbon sequestration is much greater per unit-area, in part because of their high productivity and efficiency in trapping suspended matter and associated organic carbon. Despite the value that Blue Carbon (BC) systems offer in sequestering carbon, as well as providing numerous other goods and services, these habitats are being lost at critical rates and require urgent action in order to prevent further degradation and loss. Recognition of the carbon sequestration value of vegetated coastal ecosystems provides a strong argument for their protection and restoration, and global efforts are now underway to include BC ecosystems into global carbon offset budgets, focusing on their optimal management to optimize CO2 sequestration and minimize CO2 emissions. Here, BC was investigated in the Cowichan Estuary in relation to habitat type (salt marsh, eelgrass meadow, non-vegetated mudflats, and oyster shell beds), and habitat degradation. Stored organic carbon (OC) and inorganic carbon (IC) were quantified in the top 20 cm depth of sediment cores, as well as in eelgrass and salt marsh vegetation, and then extrapolated to the areal extent of each habitat type based on a high resolution 1:12,000 scale base map of the estuary. Rates of sedimentation and carbon sequestration were quantified in each habitat type using 210Pb radiometric dating, and organic matter (OM) sources and quality were assessed in each habitat type using δ13C, C/N ratios and photopigment content in the sediments. A particular focus on the lower intertidal zone allowed us to examine the potential impact of industrial activity (log transport and storage) on the estuary’s capacity for carbon storage, as a result of a reduction of suitable habitat for eelgrass and microphytobenthos (MPB). Additionally, IC was quantified in aboveground oyster shell beds and buried oyster shell to assess inorganic storage. Finally, potential valuation of Blue Carbon in the Cowichan Estuary was investigated by comparing carbon sequestration to provincial greenhouse gas (GHG) emission equivalents as well as carbon sequestration in B.C. forests. We found that the salt marsh was the most important carbon reservoir, with a mean per-hectare sediment organic carbon (SOC) stock of 49.1 ± 19.9 Mg C ha-1, total ecosystem carbon stock (TECS) of 5443.75 Mg C, and carbon accumulation rate of 74 ± 23 g C m-2 yr-1. In the other habitats, we found SOC stocks and TECS respectively 19.1 ± 3.78 Mg C ha-1 and 3651.6 ± 72.3 Mg C in the upper mudflats, 16.9 ± 4.36 Mg C ha-1 and 1058.85 Mg C in the lower mudflats, 17.9 ± 1.21 Mg C ha−1 and 324.57 Mg C in the eelgrass meadow, and 9.43 ± 1.50 Mg C ha-1 and 59.4 Mg C in the oyster beds. The eelgrass meadow had a carbon accumulation rate of 38 ± 26 g C m-2 yr-1, while the mudflats could not successfully be dated due to erosion and/or mixing. Furthermore, the salt marsh contained the highest proportion of recalcitrant, terrestrial-derived root material which was more protected from hydrodynamic forces compared to other habitats. No pattern differences were observed between the carbon reservoirs or bulk properties of the log boom area (lower mudflat) compared to the upper mudflat, and thus there was no evidence that the log booms significantly decrease carbon sequestration in the areas where they make frequent contact with the seafloor. However, decreased chlorophyll a (chl a) concentrations in the lower mudflat sediment suggests a possible detrimental impact on microphytobenthos in addition to preventing the recolonization of the seagrass Zostera marina (Z. marina). Carbon stocks in the eelgrass meadow were similar to those of the mudflats. These carbon stocks were lower than global averages but consistent with those recently reported in low Z. marina meadows in the Pacific Northwest. Evidence of significant eelgrass vegetation outwelling necessitates further investigation to elucidate the degree to which these primary products are being decomposed or buried elsewhere in the estuary or open ocean. Since approximately half of the historical salt marsh habitat is currently reclaimed for agricultural and industrial use, consideration should be given to the role of the marsh system as a carbon reservoir in future land-use policy in the Cowichan Estuary.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,023
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,061

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0010,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0020,001
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,010
Tête enseignante GPT0,224
Écart entre enseignants0,214 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueUVic’s Research and Learning Repository (University of Victoria)Même sujetCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamicsTravaux en français237 207