MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2160046034 · doi:10.1139/x05-016

Heterogeneity in soil nitrogen within first-order forested catchments at the Turkey Lakes Watershed

2005· article· en· W2160046034 on OpenAlexfundvenueaboutno aff
N. W. Foster, John Spoelstra, Paul W. Hazlett, Sherry L. Schiff, F. D. Beall, Irena F. Creed, Clive Addison David

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDivision of Ocean SciencesNatural Resources Canada
KeywordsSoil waterHydrology (agriculture)NitrificationEnvironmental scienceMineralization (soil science)WatershedDenitrificationNitrogen cycleLeaching (pedology)NitrogenSoil scienceGeologyChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Topographic positional regulation of nitrogen (N) dynamics in soil within Canadian Shield headwaters, located in calibrated catchments containing mature, tolerant hardwood forest, was examined to determine how N pools, mineralization, nitrification, and leaching in soil relate to N export in drainage waters. A uniformly high net N mineralization and nitrification potential for surficial soil layers rich in organic N was demonstrated for ridge, upper-middle slope, and lower slope – footslope topographic positions. Results from plot-scale studies revealed that NO3– concentrations in soil water from well-drained soils were very highly variable throughout the catchments, ranging from 25 to 175 µmol·L–1, with a median of 80 µmol·L–1. The isotopic effects of denitrification were not detected in soil water collected from lower slope – footslopes, and in situ rates of N2O production from soils on lower slope – footslopes and valley bottoms were very low and highly variable. Higher N exports from soils than from streams were not explained by differences in soil water N with topographic position or denitrification in lower landscape topographic positions. Using an average soil water N value, based on the replicated plots within catchments, did not reduce the calculated substantial differences in N export between soils and streams.

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 score0.610
Threshold uncertainty score0.785

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.246 · 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

Citations15
Published2005
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207