MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096516187 · doi:10.5194/bg-10-2885-2013

Annual carbon balance of a peatland 10 yr following restoration

2013· article· en· W2096516187 on OpenAlexafffund
Maria Strack, Y. C. A. Zuback

Bibliographic record

VenueBiogeosciences · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Sphagnum Peat Moss AssociationUniversité Laval
KeywordsPeatEnvironmental scienceEcosystem respirationDissolved organic carbonCarbon fibersCarbon dioxideGrowing seasonHydrology (agriculture)Carbon sinkEcosystemMethaneCarbon cycleCarbon sequestrationPrimary productionEnvironmental chemistryChemistryGeologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Undisturbed peatlands represent long-term net sinks of carbon; however, peat extraction converts these systems into large and persistent sources of greenhouse gases. Although rewetting and restoration following peat extraction have taken place over the last several decades, very few studies have investigated the longer term impact of this restoration on peatland carbon balance. We determined the annual carbon balance of a former horticulturally-extracted peatland restored 10 yr prior to the study and compared these values to the carbon balance measured at neighboring unrestored and natural sites. Carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) fluxes were measured using the chamber technique biweekly during the growing season from May to October 2010 and three times over the winter period. Dissolved organic carbon (DOC) export was measured from remnant ditches in the unrestored and restored sites. During the growing season the restored site had greater uptake of CO2 than the natural site when photon flux density was greater than 1000 μmol m−2 s−1, while the unrestored site remained a source of CO2. Ecosystem respiration was similar between natural and restored sites, which were both significantly lower than the unrestored site. Methane flux remained low at the restored site except from open water pools, created as part of restoration, and remnant ditches. Export of DOC during the growing season was 5.0 and 28.8 g m−2 from the restored and unrestored sites, respectively. Due to dry conditions during the study year all sites acted as net carbon sources with annual balance of the natural, restored and unrestored sites of 250.7, 148.0 and 546.6 g C m−2, respectively. Although hydrological conditions and vegetation community at the restored site remained intermediate between natural and unrestored conditions, peatland restoration resulted in a large reduction in annual carbon loss from the system resulting in a carbon balance more similar to a natural peatland.

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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.210 · 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

Citations138
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiogeosciencesSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207