Rapid accretion of dissolved organic carbon in the springs of Florida: the most organic-poor natural waters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. The concentration of dissolved organic carbon (DOC) in groundwater emanating as spring discharge at several locations in Florida, USA and the net increase in DOC in the downstream receiving waters were measured as part of a larger investigation of carbon dynamics in flowing waters. Springs with high discharge (>2.8 m3 s−1) were found to be the most organic-poor natural waters yet reported (13 ± 1.6 μmol C L−1), while springs with lesser discharge exhibited somewhat higher DOC concentrations (values ranging from 30 to 77 μmol C L−1). DOC concentrations increased rapidly downstream from the point of spring discharge, with the calculated net areal input rate of DOC ranging from 0.04 to 1.64 mol C m−2 d−1 across springs. Rates of DOC increase were generally greater in those springs with high discharge rates. These input rates compare favorably with values reported for gross primary production in these macrophyte-dominated spring systems, assuming that 17% of macrophyte primary production is lost, on average, as DOC. The measures reported here are possible only because of the remarkably low DOC levels in the up-surging groundwaters and the short residency times of the water in the spring-runs themselves.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".