MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2033457978 · doi:10.1021/es502563n

Isotopic Evidence for Determining the Sources of Dissolved Organic Sulfur in a Forested Catchment

2014· article· en· W2033457978 on OpenAlexafffund
Phil-Goo Kang, Myron J. Mitchell, Bernhard Mayer, John L. Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNew York State Energy Research and Development AuthorityNational Science Foundation
KeywordsBiogeochemistryδ34SEnvironmental chemistrySulfurDrainage basinDissolved organic carbonNutrientEnvironmental scienceAbiotic componentBiogeochemical cycleOrganic matterSulfur cycleGroundwaterHydrology (agriculture)MethylmercuryCyclingChemistryEcologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Understanding sulfur (S) biogeochemistry, especially in those watersheds subject to elevated levels of atmospheric S inputs, is needed for determining the factors that contribute to acidification, nutrient losses and the mobilization of toxic solutes (e.g., monomeric aluminum and methylmercury). S is found in a variety of both organic and inorganic forms undergoing a range of biotic and abiotic transformations. In watersheds with decreasing atmospheric S inputs, internal cycling is becoming dominant in affecting whether there is net loss or retention of S. Little attention has been given to the role of dissolved organic S (DOS) in affecting S biogeochemistry. DOS originates from assimilatory and bacterial dissimilatory S reduction (BDSR), the latter of which produces (34)S-depleted S. Within groundwater of the Archer Creek Catchment in the Adirondack Mountains (New York) there was reoxidation of reduced S, which was an important source of SO4(2-). DOS in surface waters had a higher variation of δ(34)S-DOS values (-6.0 to +8.4‰) than inorganic S with δ(34)S-SO4(2-) values ranging from +1.0 to +5.8‰. Inverse correlations between δ(34)S values of SO4(2-) and DOS suggested that BDSR played an important role in producing DOS.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.182

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.201 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations19
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & Technology→Same topicMarine and coastal ecosystems→French-language works237,207→