Soil organic carbon content in northern Canada: A database of field measurements and its analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Arctic and sub-arctic soils contain a large amount of organic carbon in their topsoil horizons and in the upper layers of permafrost. There is concern that climate warming could release this soil organic carbon (SOC) to the atmosphere as greenhouse gases. However, information about the profile features and spatial distribution of SOC in northern ecosystems are far less than for other regions. In this study, we compiled all the available field measurements of SOC in northern Canada and developed a database. Including our recent measurements, the database contains 438 profiles with 1473 soil horizons. We analyzed the profile features and the regional patterns of SOC in northern Canada based on this database. The results show that the SOC content of subsurface soils is relatively high in northern regions because of the alternate freeze-thaw actions. In the top 100 cm of soils, 40% of the SOC is located in the 50- to 100-cm layer. The SOC content is lower in northern Arctic and in mountainous regions. The average upland SOC content in northern Canada is higher than in other world biomes (i.e., croplands, temperate forest, tropical savannas, and tropical forest) except temperate grasslands and boreal forest. Key words: Soil organic carbon, northern Canada, database, arctic and sub-arctic.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".