The hydrology of the Bois‐des‐Bel peatland restoration: hydrophysical properties limiting connectivity between regenerated <i>Sphagnum</i> and remnant vacuum harvested peat deposit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Bois‐des‐Bel peatland was restored in the winter of 1999; since then, an ~15–20 cm Sphagnum moss carpet has regenerated over the site, but it is currently unknown how the structure of the regenerated Sphagnum moss and cutover peat influences the hydrology of Bois‐des‐Bel. This study evaluates the hydrophysical properties of Bois‐des‐Bel, based on a combination of field and monolith experiments at a restored (RES), natural (NAT) and unrestored (UNR) site. The lowest field soil moisture in the Sphagnum moss at RES was 0.09 cm 3 cm −3 , while 0.20 cm 3 cm −3 at NAT. These results were similar in both the monolith experiments and individual core hydraulic parameterization (i.e. soil water retention and unsaturated hydraulic conductivity). The low soil moisture and relatively abundant large pores (>397 µm) in the RES Sphagnum resulted in low unsaturated hydraulic conductivity (0·23 cm day −1 at ψ = −35 cm) and high specific yield (0·45) compared with NAT Sphagnum (1·2 cm day −1 and 0·10, respectively). The abundance of large pores at RES resulted in hydrological conditions dissimilar to NAT and limited connectivity with the cutover peat, the latter being similar to UNR. To negate the implications of limited connectivity on water transfer from the cutover peat to the regenerated Sphagnum , the water table would need to fluctuate almost entirely within the regenerated Sphagnum layer. This will occur in time, as decomposition and compression cause a decrease in average pore size of the regenerated moss, thus detaining water and resulting in a higher water table. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".