Impact of soil redistribution in a sloping landscape on carbon sequestration in Northeast China
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Soil organic carbon (SOC) in eroded soil can be redistributed from upper slope positions and deposited and sequestered in depressional areas. However, the SOC lost from soil erosion is normally not considered when soil carbon budgets are derived and this could result in an overestimation of SOC loss from the agricultural areas. The impact of soil redistribution on the SOC budget of a sloping landscape in the Black soil region in Northeast China was studied using the presence of the 137 Cs tracer which has been deposited since 1954 and the fly‐ash tracer, which was deposited in 1903. Five landscape positions (summit, shoulder‐, back‐, foot‐ and toe‐slope) were selected and included in this study. The depths of 137 Cs and fly ash and the SOC content of the deposition layers were used to calculate the change in C content of the soil in the various landscape positions over the last century. We found that the most severe soil erosion occurred in soils in the shoulder‐slope position followed by the back‐slope and the summit positions. Soil deposition occurred in the toe‐slope position followed by the foot‐slope position. A total of 683 kg C was eroded from the summit, shoulder‐ and back‐slopes (in a 1 m wide strip) over the past 100 years and 418 kg C (about 61·2 per cent) was deposited in the low‐lying areas (foot‐ and toe‐slopes). Over half (61·5 per cent) of the deposition (257 kg SOC) occurred over the past 50 years. Most of the previously reported loss of C from the upper slope positions in the Black soils was in fact sequestered in the deposition areas in the landscape. Copyright © 2005 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it