Bibliographic record
Abstract
ð Soil organic matter (SOM) stability is thought to be dependent almost entirely on temperature, moisture, and microbial dynamics. While soil physical factors are also known determinants of SOM decomposition, proportionally little work has attempted to determine how these factors could regulate future rates of CO 2 release from soils under a changing climate. Here, paired lab-field experiments explore the effects of change in the physical environment and carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) respiration of SOM in mineral soil from an 80-year old red spruce forest stand in Nova Scotia, Canada. Factors tested were substrate transport, solubilization, oxygen availability, and physical structure, and were performed using the following respective disturbance methodologies: electrokinetics, wetting, air- sparging, and abrasion and compaction. Most treatments drove change in SOM decomposition rates, and the effect of the disturbance usually decayed over several days. Interestingly, laboratory and field results differed strongly, and opposite responses were often observed for a given type of disturbance. Electrokinetics, or the movement of substrates independent of other disturbances, did not produce any change to the soil CO 2 emission regime. Few studies have tackled the importance of physical controls on soil decomposition, but this is new and potentially important work for making accurate future predictions of terrestrial carbon cycling.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".