Carbonate removal by acid fumigation for measuring the δ<sup>13</sup>C of soil organic carbon
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ramnarine, R., Voroney, R. P., Wagner-Riddle, C. and Dunfield. K. E. 2011. Carbonate removal by acid fumigation for measuring the δ 13 C of soil organic carbon. Can. J. Soil Sci. 91: 247–250. Complete removal of carbonates from calcareous soil samples is critical for accurate measurement of the quantity and isotopic signature (δ13C) of soil organic carbon (SOC). Carbonates confound SOC and δ13C measurements because they have δ13C values ranging from −10‰ to +2‰, whereas those of soil organic carbon range from −27‰ to −13‰, depending on the source of plant residues. Commonly used methods for removing carbonates involve treatment with acid followed by repeated water washings; however, these methods are time consuming, labour-intensive and lead to losses of acid- and water-soluble organic carbon. Fumigation of soil samples with HCl was evaluated as an alternative method, and the time required for complete carbonate removal was determined in this study. Moistened soil samples, taken from 0- to 10-cm and 30- to 50-cm depths, were exposed to HCl vapours for periods of 0, 6, 12, 24, 48, 72, and 96 h, followed by measurements of total C and δ13C using coupled elemental analyzer-isotope ratio mass spectrometry. The minimum time required to remove all carbonates was ca. 30 h and 56 h for surface and subsurface soils containing 0.80 and 1.94% inorganic C, respectively. Therefore, the fumigation period required is dependent on the total carbonate content of the sample and the nature of the carbonate (pedogenic vs lithogenic). In our study, the rate of removal of inorganic carbon was 0.08–0.10 mg h−1 for soil samples sizes with 2.4 to 5.8 mg of carbonate-C, a rate similar to previous studies on acid fumigation. A “correction factor” was used to account for a change in sample mass due to fumigation and is necessary for accurate determination of SOC concentration using our proposed methodology.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".