Soil charcoal stability over the Holocene across boreal northeastern North America
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The analysis of macroscopic wood charcoal fragments extracted from soils is frequently used as a palaeoecological tool for reconstructing stand-scale forest composition and fire history. Here we explored the putative loss of palaeoecological information due to charcoal degradation through time and in different biogeographical settings. We compared the relationship between charcoal mass and abundance for soil samples from five biogeographical regions of boreal northeastern North America spanning most of the Holocene period. We verified whether charcoal (Ø ≥ 2 mm) conservation differed as a consequence of different taphonomical processes between organic and mineral soil types. We also assessed the mass/abundance relationship as a function of charcoal residence time in soil. Overall, the slope of the regression between charcoal particles mass (g) and abundance (number of particles) was 0.0042. The slope was not significantly different in samples from organic and mineral soil, and all biogeographical regions had similar slope values except one (higher charcoal fragmentation, probably due to high colluvial activity). Charcoal conservation also did not vary according to residence time in soil. This study shows that macroscopic soil charcoal particles resist fragmentation over millennia in different biogeographical settings and under the influence of various taphonomical processes.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".