MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2303097961 · doi:10.1002/2015jg002938

Climate and peat type in relation to spatial variation of the peatland carbon mass in the Hudson Bay Lowlands, Canada

2016· article· en· W2303097961 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Maara Packalen, Sarah A. Finkelstein, James W. McLaughlin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsOntario Forest Research InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Forest ServiceMinistry of Natural ResourcesAssociation of Canadian Universities for Northern StudiesAboriginal Affairs and Northern Development CanadaSociety of Wetland ScientistsCanadian Forest ServiceOntario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry
KeywordsPeatBogPhysical geographySpatial distributionEnvironmental scienceCarbon sinkSpatial variabilityClimate changeGeologyEcologyGeographyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Northern peatlands store ~500 Pg of carbon (C); however, controls on the spatial distribution of the stored C may differ regionally, owing to the complex interaction among climate, ecosystem processes, and geophysical controls. As a globally significant C sink, elucidation of controls on the distribution of C in the Hudson Bay Lowlands, Canada (HBL), is of particular importance. Although peat age is related to timing of land emergence and peat depth in the HBL, considerable variation in the total C mass (kg m −2 ) among sites of similar peat age suggests that other factors may explain spatial patterns in C storage (Pg) and sequestration. Here we quantify the role of two key factors in explaining the spatial distribution of the C mass in the HBL ( n = 364 sites), (i) climate variability and (ii) peat lithology, for two major peatland classes in the HBL (bogs and fens). We find that temperature, precipitation, and evapotranspiration each explained nearly half of the C mass variability. Regions characterized by warmer and wetter conditions stored the most C as peat. Our results show that bogs and fens store similar amounts of C within a given climate domain, although via distinct storage mechanisms. Namely, fen peats tend to be shallower and more C dense (kg m −3 ) compared to bogs. Following geophysical controls on the timing of peat initiation, our results reveal that both the widespread bog‐fen patterning and variability in regional climate contribute to explaining the spatial distribution of the peat C mass in the HBL.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.594

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations39
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research BiogeosciencesSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207