MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2322873720 · doi:10.1021/es1032585

CO<sub>2</sub>-Efflux Measurements for Evaluating Source Zone Natural Attenuation Rates in a Petroleum Hydrocarbon Contaminated Aquifer

2010· article· en· W2322873720 on OpenAlexafffund
Natasha Sihota, Olga Singurindy, K. Ulrich Mayer

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaU.S. Geological Survey
KeywordsContaminationMineralization (soil science)Environmental chemistryBiodegradationAquiferPetroleumHydrocarbonVadose zonePollutionEnvironmental scienceTotal petroleum hydrocarbonGroundwaterSoil contaminationSoil scienceEnvironmental engineeringChemistryGeologySoil waterEcologyGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In order to gain regulatory approval for source zone natural attenuation (SZNA) at hydrocarbon-contaminated sites, knowledge regarding the extent of the contamination, its tendency to spread, and its longevity is required. However, reliable quantification of biodegradation rates, an important component of SZNA, remains a challenge. If the rate of CO(2) gas generation associated with contaminant degradation can be determined, it may be used as a proxy for the overall rate of subsurface biodegradation. Here, the CO(2)-efflux at the ground surface is measured using a dynamic closed chamber (DCC) method to evaluate whether this technique can be used to assess the areal extent of the contaminant source zone and the depth-integrated rate of contaminant mineralization. To this end, a field test was conducted at the Bemidji, MN, crude oil spill site. Results indicate that at the Bemidji site the CO(2)-efflux method is able to both delineate the source zone and distinguish between the rates of natural soil respiration and contaminant mineralization. The average CO(2)-efflux associated with contaminant degradation in the source zone is estimated at 2.6 μmol m(-2) s(-1), corresponding to a total petroleum hydrocarbon mineralization rate (expressed as C(10)H(22)) of 3.3 g m(-2) day(-1).

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.233 · 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

Citations84
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & TechnologySame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207