MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Holocene peat growth and decay dynamics in sub‐arctic peat plateaus, west‐central Canada

2009· article· en· W2077813923 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
A. Britta K. Sannel, Peter Kuhry

Bibliographic record

VenueBoreas · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGeology and Paleoclimatology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeatRadiocarbon datingPermafrostGeologyAccelerator mass spectrometryHolocenePlateau (mathematics)Carbon fibersPhysical geographyPaleontologyOceanographyEcologyBiologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peat and net carbon accumulation rates in two sub‐arctic peat plateaus of west‐central Canada have been studied through geochemical analyses and accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS) radiocarbon dating. The peatland sites started to develop around 6600–5900 cal. yr BP and the peat plateau stages are characterized by Sphagnum fuscum peat alternating with rootlet layers. The long‐term peat and net carbon accumulation rates for both profiles are 0.30–0.31 mm/yr and 12.5–12.7 gC/m2yr, respectively. These values reflect very slow peat accumulation (0.04–0.09 mm/yr) and net carbon accumulation (3.7–5.2 gC/m2yr) in the top rootlet layers. Extensive AMS radiocarbon dating of one profile shows that accumulation rates are variable depending on peat plateau stage. Peat accumulation rates are up to six times higher and net carbon accumulation rates up to four times higher in S. fuscum than in rootlet stages. Local fires represented by charcoal remains in some of the rootlet layers result in very low accumulation rates. High C/N ratios throughout most of the peat profiles suggest low degrees of decomposition due to stable permafrost conditions. Hence, original peat accretion has remained largely unaltered, except in the initial stages of peatland development when permafrost was not yet present.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations63
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBoreasSame topicGeology and Paleoclimatology ResearchFrench-language works237,207