Biogeochemical cycles of Chernobyl-born radionuclides in the contaminated forest ecosystems: long-term dynamics of the migration processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The paper integrates the results of 25-year monitoring study of 137 Cs and 90 Sr biogeochemical cycle in the forest ecosystems of Russia and Ukraine contaminated due to the Chernobyl accident. The monitoring network was established in 1986 as a number of long-term key sites (KS) located 5 to over 500 km from the Chernobyl NPP. The following components have been monitored: biota (trees, grass and shrubs, mosses, and fungi), soils (forest litter and mineral horizons), soil water, and throughfall. Presently, 25 years after the Chernobyl fallout, 137 Cs and 90 Sr uptake by vegetation exceed their infiltration through the soil, i.e. biogeochemical cycle currently plays an important role impeding the radionuclide infiltration through soil to the ground water. In wet, accumulative landscapes, biota is a leading factor of the radionuclide cycle, while in dry, eluvial landscapes, soil absorbing complex plays a more important role. The effect of landscape type is manifested for 137 Cs, yet less important for 90 Sr. 137 Cs is actively uptaken by the fungi complex, while 90 Sr is primarily accumulated in the arboreal vegetation. Biogeochemical fluxes of 137 Cs and 39 K in some ecosystems are still different, even 25 years after the fallout.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 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".