Methane fluxes measured by eddy covariance and static chamber techniques at a temperate forest in central Ontario, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Methane flux measurements were carried out at a temperate forest (Haliburton Forest and Wildlife Reserve) in central Ontario (45°17´11´´ N, 78°32´19´´ W) from June to October 2011. Continuous measurements were made by an off-axis integrated cavity output spectrometer that measures methane (CH4) at 10 Hz sampling rates. Fluxes were calculated from the gas measurements in conjunction with wind data collected by a 3-D sonic anemometer using the eddy covariance (EC) method. Observed methane fluxes showed net uptake of CH4 over the measurement period with an average uptake flux (±standard deviation of the mean) of −2.7 ± 0.13 nmol m−2 s−1. Methane fluxes showed a seasonal progression with average rates of uptake increasing from June through September and remaining high in October. This pattern was consistent with a decreasing trend in soil moisture content at the monthly timescale. On the diurnal timescale, there was evidence of increased uptake during the day, when the mid-canopy wind speed was at a maximum. These patterns suggest that substrate supply of CH4 to methanotrophs, and in certain cases hypoxic soil conditions supporting methanogenesis in low-slope areas, drives the observed variability in fluxes. A network of soil static chambers used at the tower site showed reasonable agreement with the seasonal trend and overall magnitude of the eddy covariance flux measurements. This suggests that soil-level microbial processes, and not abiological leaf-level CH4 production, drive overall CH4 dynamics in temperate forest ecosystems such as Haliburton Forest.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".