MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2035242062 · doi:10.1139/x08-207

Influence of fire and harvest on soil organic carbon in jack pine sites

2009· article· en· W2035242062 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Charlotte E. Norris, Sylvie A. Quideau, Jagtar S. Bhatti, Roderick E. Wasylishen, M. Derek MacKenzie

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaNatural Resources CanadaAlberta Glycomics CentreCanadian Forest Service
FundersCanada Research ChairsGovernment of Canada
KeywordsMagic angle spinningTaigaSoil waterSoil carbonBorealCharEnvironmental scienceSoil scienceLoblolly pineCarbon fibersChemistryPinus <genus>GeologyPyrolysisEcologyBotanyNuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopyMaterials scienceBiologyPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Boreal forest soils represent a considerable reservoir of carbon on a global basis. The objective of this study was to compare the response of soil organic carbon (OC) to disturbance along two jack pine ( Pinus banksiana Lamb.) chronosequences of either fire or harvest origin. Total OC stocks were determined for the A and B horizons, and results indicated a recovery to predisturbance levels by 30 years in both chronosequences. To further characterize OC composition at all sites, we used a combination of physical fractionation of soil OC pools, 13C isotopic determination, and cross-polarization magic-angle spinning 13C nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy. OC within all soils was dominated by a labile pool associated with the coarse-sand fraction. The relative importance of this labile pool increased with time since disturbance along both chronosequences. However, the fire and harvested sites differed in terms of the macromolecular composition of soil OC as determined by NMR. In particular, spectra of the forest floors from the two younger fire sites showed a high aromatic OC intensity that may be attributed to the presence of char. Interestingly, our results also indicated that with increasing time since fire, this char was transferred from the forest floors to the A horizons.

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 score0.960
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations28
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest Research→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→