MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983239894 · doi:10.1139/a02-004

Carbon cycling in peatlands A review of processes and controls

2002· review· en· W1983239894 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christian Blodau

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2002
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeatCarbon cycleEnvironmental scienceMethaneCarbon dioxideCarbon sinkGreenhouse gasEcosystemCarbon sequestrationPrimary productionCarbon fibersSoil carbonEnvironmental chemistryEcologyChemistrySoil scienceSoil water

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Covering only 3% of the land area, northern peatlands store about 30% of the global soil carbon and account for 5 to 10% of the global methane burden to the atmosphere. A review of the literature on net ecosystem exchange, net primary productivity, carbon mineralization, methane emissions, and dissolved organic carbon dynamics indicates that peatlands can be both C sources and sinks. The temporal and spatial variability of fluxes is large, but a substantial portion of this variation can be explained by environmental and ecological variables. Uncertainty in predictions about carbon dynamics under changing environmental conditions arises from a number of knowledge gaps: (i) the understanding of how organic matter is mineralized and partitioned into carbon dioxide, methane, and dissolved organic carbon is insufficient; (ii) little is known about the consequences of long-term and short-term disturbances, such as elevated carbon dioxide concentrations, nitrogen and sulfur deposition, fire, and droughts, on the individual components of the carbon cycle; (iii) models that capture the dynamic interaction of the processes and their controls have not been developed yet, with the notable exception of methane dynamics. Key words: peatlands, carbon cycle, organic matter, carbon dioxide, methane, climate change.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations415
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207