Lake Metabolism: Comparison of Lake Metabolic Rates Estimated from a Diel CO2- and the Common Diel O2-Technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lake metabolism is a key factor for the understanding of turnover of energy and of organic and inorganic matter in lake ecosystems. Long-term time series on metabolic rates are commonly estimated from diel changes in dissolved oxygen. Here we present long-term data on metabolic rates based on diel changes in total dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) utilizing an open-water diel CO2-technique. Metabolic rates estimated with this technique and the traditional diel O2-technique agree well in alkaline Lake Illmensee (pH of ~8.5), although the diel changes in molar CO2 concentrations are much smaller than those of the molar O2 concentrations. The open-water diel CO2- and diel O2-techniques provide independent measures of lake metabolic rates that differ in their sensitivity to transport processes. Hence, the combination of both techniques can help to constrain uncertainties arising from assumptions on vertical fluxes due to gas exchange and turbulent diffusion. This is particularly important for estimates of lake respiration rates because these are much more sensitive to assumptions on gradients in vertical fluxes of O2 or DIC than estimates of lake gross primary production. Our data suggest that it can be advantageous to estimate respiration rates assuming negligible gradients in vertical fluxes rather than including gas exchange with the atmosphere but neglecting vertical mixing in the water column. During two months in summer the average lake net production was close to zero suggesting at most slightly autotrophic conditions. However, the lake emitted O2 and CO2 during the entire time period suggesting that O2 and CO2 emissions from lakes can be decoupled from the metabolism in the near surface layer.
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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".