Pool size structure indicates developmental stages of boreal fens
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Several boreal fens belong to the patterned fen category, which is composed of two compartments, the pool (or hollow), and the string (or hummock) compartments. Both compartments are distributed perpendicular to the mire slope and drainage flow. The surface of patterned fens is repeatedly invaded by water, which is known to affect the original pool–string pattern through the creation and enlargement of pools, a process caused by the action of aqualysis. Aqualysis refers to the destruction of the vegetation cover by flooding of low-elevated strings or lawns causing the formation and enlargement of pools. It is argued here that the nature and composition of the pool structure (number and size) reveal the state of development of patterned fens of the boreal environment. Quantitative and spatial data for pool size structure in 24 fens of northern Quebec, including 4881 pools, were used for the assessment of patterned fen development. Among the main factors influencing patterned fen development, area and slope contribute to the construction of the peatland surface. Also, watershed area, alternating strings and hollows, and peat thickness all facilitate pool creation and expansion. The construction of the pool structure of most fens has been a long process of ecosystem building. This probably explains why most sloping fens, i.e, moderate- and steep-sloping fens, are today at an equilibrium stage characterized by the coexistence of pools of all sizes with the smallest pools being the most numerous. In contrast, most low-sloping fens have developed toward a lacustrine stage with a bimodal distribution of small and very large pools. Boreal patterned fens of all developmental stages will be subject to increased pool size and number in the near future if more humid climatic conditions prevail.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".