MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Distribution and regulation of urea in lakes of central North America

2012· article· en· W1595995779 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Matthew J. Bogard, Derek B. Donald, Kerri Finlay, Peter R. Leavitt

Bibliographic record

VenueFreshwater Biology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Regina
KeywordsUreaEnvironmental scienceBiogeochemistryPlanktonZooplanktonNutrientEnvironmental chemistryWater columnEcologyEutrophicationHydrology (agriculture)ChemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Summary 1. Urea accounts for ∼50% of global nitrogen (N)‐based fertiliser; however, little is known of the factors regulating its distribution and abundance in freshwaters. Improved understanding of urea biogeochemistry is essential because its use as fertiliser is expected to double by 2050 and because pollution with urea can promote outbreaks of toxic cyanobacteria in phosphorus (P)‐rich lakes in regions with intensive agricultural or urban development. 2. Biweekly measurements of urea concentration and diverse limnological variables (water chemistry, hydrology, algae, zooplankton) were taken during two summers (2008, 2009) in a chain of seven productive lakes within a 52 000‐km 2 catchment in central Canada to quantify environmental and anthropogenic correlates of temporal and spatial patterns of urea occurrence. 3. Mean (±SD) urea concentrations varied between 29 ± 14 and 132 ± 65 μg N L −1 , generally increased from headwater to downstream sites and represented 10–50% of bioavailable N (as sum of , and urea). Principal components analysis demonstrated that urea concentrations were elevated in agriculturally impacted lakes with abundant dissolved organic and inorganic nutrients (N, P, C) and low O 2 concentrations, but were not correlated consistently with plankton abundance or community composition. Urea concentrations were more than twofold greater in lakes receiving N from cities than in agriculturally affected basins, despite low summer concentrations of urea in tertiary‐treated urban effluent ( c . 50% of lake values). Multiple regression models evaluated using Akaike Information Criterion showed that mean water‐column O 2 concentration was the single best predictor of in situ urea concentrations ( r 2 = 0.91, P = 0.002), but that urea concentrations were also correlated significantly with changes in longitudinal position and Secchi depth and with concentrations of , non‐urea dissolved organic N (DON) and dissolved inorganic carbon. 4. Additional seasonal surveys of up to 69 closed‐basin lakes within a 100 000‐km 2 region during 2004 and 2008 revealed that urea was abundant in 100% of measured sites and exhibited concentrations (81 ± 48 μg N L −1 ) similar to those observed in lakes with surface drainage (58 ± 38 μg N L −1 ). Further, non‐urea DON accounted for 50–99% of the total dissolved N pool in both open‐ and closed‐basin lakes. 5. When combined with an extensive literature review and previous mass‐budget analyses of the study lakes, these findings allowed the development of a first‐generation model of the mechanisms regulating urea content of P‐rich lakes of central North America. In this model, water‐column concentrations of urea are predicted to be regulated mainly by algal decomposition in anoxic environments (sediments, hypolimnion), followed by redistribution into surface waters. Consequently, anthropogenic activities can increase the urea content of lakes by stimulating primary production, sedimentation and deepwater anoxia and by increasing influx of undegraded urea from agricultural and urban sources.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations73
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFreshwater BiologySame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207