MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2136745142 · doi:10.1139/f10-052

Sensitivity of pH in a boreal stream network to a potential decrease in base cations caused by forest harvest

2010· article· en· W2136745142 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Anneli Ågren, Ishi Buffam, Kevin Bishop, Hjalmar Laudon

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSvenska Forskningsrådet Formas
KeywordsSnowmeltBorealEnvironmental scienceSurface runoffHydrology (agriculture)Acid neutralizing capacitySTREAMSDrainage basinTaigaSpring (device)Soil waterEcologyChemistryAcid depositionSoil scienceGeographyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Increased forest harvest with more whole-tree utilization can decrease base cations (BC) in soils and stream runoff. This paper analyses how reducing stream BC changes the capacity of a boreal stream network to buffer pH changes. We estimated change in stream pH during spring snowmelt in 60 locations throughout a 68 km2 boreal catchment in northern Sweden with different scenarios of BC removal from stream water ranging from 10 to 50 µequiv.·L–1. The pH decreased in all scenarios, and if BC decreased by 50 µequiv.·L–1, stream length with pH above the acid threshold pH 5 during spring snowmelt decreased from 82% to 44% of the stream network, whereas the stream length with pH above 5.5 decreased from 60% to 10%. The pH sensitivity of different stream reaches to reductions in BC was positively related to the slope of the catchment, forest cover, and forested mires, whereas it was negatively related to the percentage of agricultural fields. Because the long-term effect of different forestry practices on stream BC is unclear, there is all the more reason to evaluate BC sensitivity before, rather than after, eventual problems arise.

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)0.001
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 score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.194
Teacher spread0.186 · 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

Citations16
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic SciencesSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207