The effect of peatland harvesting on snow accumulation, ablation and snow surface energy balance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Snow distribution, ablation and snowmelt energy balance components were characterized in a vacuum harvested and an adjacent undisturbed forested section of a peatland during the 2009 snowmelt period to determine snow distribution and melt dynamics on a previously harvested peatland, since abandoned and partly revegetated. The forested peatland had the deepest snowpack at 121 cm, particularly along the edge of the forested section adjacent to the more windblown previously harvested peatland. The snowpack density was greatest in the harvested peatland, which was subject to greater wind compaction and mid‐winter melt‐refreeze episodes; however, snow water equivalence was higher in the forested peatland. Radiative fluxes dominated the snowmelt energy balance. Increased canopy cover within the forested peatland restricted incident radiation and delayed melt, whereas melt rates were rapid across the harvested peatland, driven by higher radiant and turbulent fluxes. Ablation calculated using a simple, one‐dimensional model showed good temporal agreement with the observed ablation trends except when standing melt water pooled on the surface of the harvested section, causing more rapid modelled melt rates than observed. The shallower snowpack and more rapid melt across the harvested peatland limited the amount of melt water that was available for spring recharge. Copyright © 2012 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".