Can boreal peatlands with pools be net sinks for CO <sub>2</sub> ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Peatland open-water pools, a common feature on temperate to subarctic peatlands, are sources of carbon (C) to the atmosphere but their contribution to the net ecosystem carbon dioxide exchange (NEE-CO 2 ) is poorly known; there is a question as to whether peatlands with pools are smaller sinks of atmospheric C, or even C-neutral, compared to other peatlands. We present growing season NEE-CO 2 measurements using the eddy covariance technique in a peatland with pools. We found the maximum photosynthetic uptake and ecosystem respiration rates at 10 °C to be in the lower range of the published data. The lower total vegetation biomass, due to the presence of pools, reduced CO 2 uptake during day and the autotrophic component of ecosystem respiration. The low CO 2 uptake combined with reduced CO 2 loss resulted in the site being a net sink for CO 2 of a similar magnitude as other northern peatlands despite the inclusion of pools.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".