MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2752970580 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2017-0194

Soil biogeochemical responses to the deposition of anadromous fish carcasses in inland riparian forests of the Pacific Northwest, USA

2017· article· en· W2752970580 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Tadd A. Wheeler, Kathleen L. Kavanagh

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSoil and Water Nutrient Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBonneville Power AdministrationU.S. Forest ServiceIdaho Department of Fish and Game
KeywordsBiogeochemical cycleRiparian zoneFish migrationEnvironmental scienceEcosystemDeposition (geology)NutrientBiogeochemistryEcologyBiologyHabitat

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The historic abundance of salmonids returning to natal streams of the inland Pacific Northwest, USA, may have constituted a major nutrient influx into these commonly oligotrophic ecosystems. Inland ecosystems tend to be warmer and dryer and more nutrient limited than coastal ecosystems; therefore, understanding how these inland conditions influence the soil biogeochemical responses to salmon carcass deposition in riparian forests is a vital step in appropriately mitigating for the loss of this nutrient subsidy. Deposition of salmon carcasses in central Idaho riparian forests resulted in a 480-fold increase in soil nitrogen (N), a sevenfold increase in dissolved organic carbon (C), and a fourfold increase in soil respired CO 2, with significant biogeochemical responses persisting at one year after amendment. Despite these large increases in soil N and C, estimates of soil N and C loading only accounted for 31% and 16% of the fish carcass N and C, respectively. However, the magnitude and persistence of soil biogeochemical responses to the deposition of anadromous fish carcasses in central Idaho attests to the importance of this nutrient subsidy to inland riparian ecosystems of the Pacific Northwest.

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 score0.139
Threshold uncertainty score0.277

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations17
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicSoil and Water Nutrient DynamicsFrench-language works237,207