MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152206558 · doi:10.1029/2002gb001889

Seasonal contribution of CO<sub>2</sub>fluxes in the annual C budget of a northern bog

2003· article· en· W2152206558 on OpenAlexaff
C. L. Roehm, Nigel T. Roulet

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Biogeochemical Cycles · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeatEnvironmental scienceBogGrowing seasonTemperate climatePrimary productionCarbon dioxideAtmospheric sciencesEcosystem respirationEcosystemCarbon cycleAtmosphere (unit)Hydrology (agriculture)AgronomyEcologyBiologyGeographyMeteorologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peatlands are sinks for carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) because net primary production exceeds decomposition. The contribution of non‐growing‐season fluxes to the annual C budget of a peatland is, to date, little studied. We therefore measured the changes in the pattern of carbon exchange with seasons in a bog located in the cool temperate climate region. The growing season CO 2 ‐C uptake was of −113 g m −2 . During the non‐growing season, 36 g C m −2 was lost to the atmosphere, resulting in an estimated net ecosystem production of −76 g C m −2 . Despite the non‐growing‐season loss equaling 33 to 40% of the summer uptake, the net annual accumulation of was 3 times the long‐term average net accumulation rate usually cited in the literature. The high rate of non‐growing‐season efflux could be supported directly by temporal concurrent respiration and the release of stored CO 2 from prior production. These results indicate the need to revise current models to address peat thermal properties inducing CO 2 production at lower temperature ranges.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.140
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.214 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations56
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Biogeochemical CyclesSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207