MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2604428521

Wet and Dry Deposition of Water-Soluble Inorganic Ions, in Particular Reactive Nitrogen Species, to Haliburton Forest

2010· dissertation· en· W2604428521 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Avila N. F. De Sousa

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2010
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicLichen and fungal ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNitrogenReactive nitrogenEnvironmental chemistryDeposition (geology)Inorganic ionsEnvironmental scienceChemistryIonBiologyOrganic chemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Open and throughfall precipitation samples were collected at Haliburton Forest for a total of nine events from July – November of 2009. The following species were analyzed quantitatively: NO3-, SO42-, Cl-, HCOO-, C2O42-, NH4+, Na+, K+, Ca2+, and Mg2+. Wet deposition inputs to the system were quantified and the sources of wet-deposited species were probed. The throughfall method was employed to quantify inputs to the forest floor and probe canopy-precipitation interactions. Leaf wash samples at three heights aided in the interpretation of throughfall data and allowed for an examination of vertical profiles of dry deposition to the canopy. Results suggest possible nitrate foliar leaching during the growing season, although this appears to cease during senescence. This finding supports previous evidence that Haliburton Forest has shifted from nitrogen-limitation toward nitrogen-saturation and estimated total atmospheric N inputs to the system are close to the proposed critical load of 10 kg N ha-1 yr-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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score0.492

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.139
Teacher spread0.136 · 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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicLichen and fungal ecologyFrench-language works237,207