Modeling the mechanisms that control in‐stream dissolved organic carbon dynamics in upland and forested catchments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a new, process‐based model of soil and stream water dissolved organic carbon (DOC): the Integrated Catchments Model for Carbon (INCA‐C). INCA‐C is the first model of DOC cycling to explicitly include effects of different land cover types, hydrological flow paths, in‐soil carbon biogeochemistry, and surface water processes on in‐stream DOC concentrations. It can be calibrated using only routinely available monitoring data. INCA‐C simulates daily DOC concentrations over a period of years to decades. Sources, sinks, and transformation of solid and dissolved organic carbon in peat and forest soils, wetlands, and streams as well as organic carbon mineralization in stream waters are modeled. INCA‐C is designed to be applied to natural and seminatural forested and peat‐dominated catchments in boreal and temperate regions. Simulations at two forested catchments showed that seasonal and interannual patterns of DOC concentration could be modeled using climate‐related parameters alone. A sensitivity analysis showed that model predictions were dependent on the mass of organic carbon in the soil and that in‐soil process rates were dependent on soil moisture status. Sensitive rate coefficients in the model included those for organic carbon sorption and desorption and DOC mineralization in the soil. The model was also sensitive to the amount of litter fall. Our results show the importance of climate variability in controlling surface water DOC concentrations and suggest the need for further research on the mechanisms controlling production and consumption of DOC in soils.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".