MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2616404162 · doi:10.1038/ncomms15347

Global perturbation of organic carbon cycling by river damming

2017· article· en· W2616404162 on OpenAlexafffund
Taylor Maavara, Ronny Lauerwald, Pierre Regnier, Philippe Van Cappellen

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Communications · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Excellence Research Chairs, Government of CanadaAgence Nationale de la RechercheEuropean Commission
KeywordsMineralization (soil science)Environmental scienceTotal organic carbonCarbon cycleGreenhouse gasCyclingOrganic matterHydrology (agriculture)Environmental chemistryPhysical geographySoil scienceOceanographyGeologyEcosystemEcologyChemistryGeographySoil waterBiologyForestry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The damming of rivers represents one of the most far-reaching human modifications of the flows of water and associated matter from land to sea. Dam reservoirs are hotspots of sediment accumulation, primary productivity ( P ) and carbon mineralization ( R ) along the river continuum. Here we show that for the period 1970–2030, global carbon mineralization in reservoirs exceeds carbon fixation ( P ); the global P/R ratio, however, varies significantly, from 0.20 to 0.58 because of the changing age distribution of dams. We further estimate that at the start of the twenty-first century, in-reservoir burial plus mineralization eliminated 4.0±0.9 Tmol per year (48±11 Tg C per year) or 13% of total organic carbon (OC) carried by rivers to the oceans. Because of the ongoing boom in dam building, in particular in emerging economies, this value could rise to 6.9±1.5 Tmol per year (83±18 Tg C per year) or 19% by 2030.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations427
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature CommunicationsSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207