Technical Note: Development of an automated lysimeter for the calculation of peat soil actual evapotranspiration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. A limited number of publications in the literature deal with the measurement of actual evapotranspiration (AET) from a peat soil. AET is an important parameter in the description of water pathways of an ecosystem. In peatlands, where the water table is near the surface and the vegetation is composed of nonvascular plants without stomatal resistance, the AET measurement represents a challenge. This paper discusses the development of an automated lysimeter installed between 12 and 27 July 2010, at a 11-ha bog site, Pont-Rouge (42 km west of Quebec City, Canada). This system was made of an isolated block of peat, maintained at the same water level as the surrounding water table by a system of submersible pressure transmitters and pumps. The change in water level in millimetres in the isolated block of peat was used to calculate the water lost through evapotranspiration (ET) while accounting the precipitation. The rates of AET were calculated for each day of the study period. Temperature fluctuated between 17.2 and 23.3 °C and total rainfall was 43.76 mm. AET rates from 0.6 to 6.9 mm day−1 were recorded, with a ΣAET/ΣP ratio of 1.38. The estimated potential ET (PET) resulting from Thornthwaite's semi-empirical formula suggested values between 2.8 and 3.9 mm day−1. The average AET/PET ratio was 1.13. According to the literature, the results obtained are plausible. This system, relatively inexpensive and simple to install, may eventually be used to calculate AET on peaty soils in the years to come.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
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".