Carbon sink potential of biosolid reclaimed mine tailings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Surface mining can decrease carbon (C) but reclamation can improve soil quality and promote plant growth while restoring the terrestrial C sink. The objective of this study was to determine the effects of biosolids on the C storage capacity of mine tailings over time. Changes in C, nitrogen (N) and plant production over a 13 year period at a deactivated tailings site at Highland Valley Copper mine situated in interior British Columbia, were evaluated. Soil and biomass samples were taken in 2011 and compared to data from a study originally established in 1998. A randomized block design was used and the treatments included a control (no biosolids) and biosolids at application rates of 150 and 250 Mg ha⁻¹. Data was compiled in a chronosequence (representing years 0, 1, 2, and 13 years of reclamation) and analyzed. Biosolids increased total C, N and plant biomass while lowering the C:N ratio. Tailings C concentrations ranged from 1.4% for the control up to 17.2% for the 250 Mg ha⁻¹ treatment. Depending on the biosolid application rate, tailings sequestered up to 14 Mg C ha⁻¹ yr⁻¹ during the 13 years of reclamation. The results show that the use of biosolids during reclamation can improve the C sequestering capacity of mine tailings, which is beneficial to the restoration of the terrestrial C sink and the global C cycle.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".