MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2164887764 · doi:10.1139/e99-097

Spatial and temporal trends in carbon storage of peatlands of continental western Canada through the Holocene

2000· article· en· W2164887764 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Dale H. Vitt, Linda A. Halsey, Ilka E. Bauer, Celina Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Earth Sciences · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeatHoloceneCarbon sinkDeglaciationSubarctic climateGeologyPermafrostCarbon cycleContinental shelfOceanographyPhysical geographyEnvironmental scienceCarbon fibersBorealClimate changeEcosystemEcologyGeographyPaleontologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peatlands of continental western Canada (Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba) cover 365 157 km2 and store 48.0 Pg of carbon representing 2.1% of the world's terrestrial carbon within 0.25% of the global landbase. Only a small amount, 0.10 Pg (0.2%) of this carbon, is currently stored in the above-ground biomass. Carbon storage in peatlands has changed significantly since deglaciation. Peatlands began to accumulate carbon around 9000 years ago in this region, after an initial deglacial lag. Carbon accumulation was climatically limited throughout much of continental western Canada by early Holocene maximum insolation. After 6000 BP, carbon accumulation increased significantly, with about half of current stores being reached by 4000 BP. Around 3000 BP carbon accumulation in continental western Canada began to slow as permafrost developed throughout the subarctic and boreal region and the current southern limit of peatlands was reached. Peatlands in continental western Canada continue to increase their total carbon storage today by 19.4 g m-2 year-1, indicating that regionally this ecosystem remains a large carbon sink.

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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations396
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Earth SciencesSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207