MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1644947174 · doi:10.1029/2008wr006832

Methylmercury dynamics at the upland‐peatland interface: Topographic and hydrogeochemical controls

2009· article· en· W1644947174 on OpenAlexafffund
Carl P. J. Mitchell, Brian A. Branfireun, Randall K. Kolka

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMercury impact and mitigation studies
Canadian institutionsThe Scarborough HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersU.S. Forest ServiceUniversity of TorontoNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsPeatMethylmercuryDissolved organic carbonBiotaHydrology (agriculture)Environmental scienceSulfateWatershedEnvironmental chemistryBioaccumulationGeologyEcologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peatlands are important environments for the transformation of atmospherically deposited inorganic mercury into the bioaccumulative form, methylmercury (MeHg), which may accumulate in downstream aquatic biota, particularly in fish. In recent research, it was suggested that MeHg production and/or accumulation “hot spots” at the upland‐peatland interface were the result of upland fluxes of sulfate and labile dissolved organic carbon (DOC) into the peatland margin. Along the upland‐peatland interface, spatial heterogeneity of “hot spots” was thought to be a result of variations in upland hydrologic interaction with the peatland margin. This hypothesis was tested in this study. Pore water MeHg, sulfate, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentrations were compared in peatland plots at the base of both topographically concave and linear upland subcatcments in Minnesota. Subcatchment contributing areas were 3–8 times larger in the peatland plots adjacent to areas of concave upland topography. Peat pore water MeHg concentrations were significantly higher in these plots. Fluxes of water, sulfate, and dissolved organic carbon (DOC) from the upland hillslope into the peatland margin were also generally much larger than those from below areas of concave upland topography. Taken together, these results suggest that watershed geomorphology plays an important role in controlling chemical fluxes into peatland margins and consequently MeHg production and accumulation. It may thus be possible to delineate areas of high MeHg production and/or accumulation in certain watersheds by using high‐resolution topographic data. The resulting MeHg “hot spots” may be important for locally foraging biota and for downstream loading, especially in the spring and fall.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.635
Threshold uncertainty score0.939

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations54
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Resources ResearchSame topicMercury impact and mitigation studiesFrench-language works237,207