Daytime-only measurements underestimate CH₄ emissions from a restored bog
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Accurate estimates of methane (CH4) fluxes from restored peatlands are needed to inform emission factor estimations and reporting. Flux measurements are usually taken during the daytime but such measurements may provide biased estimates of overall CH4 emissions if night-time fluxes differ from daytime fluxes. Diurnal variations in CH4 fluxes have been reported for a range of peatland types, but not for restored raised bogs which are important carbon stores in some countries. To help fill this knowledge gap, we investigated diurnal variations in CH4 emissions from a restored raised bog. CH4 fluxes from a restored raised bog were measured in two 24-hr field campaigns using flux chambers. Carbon dioxide (CO2) fluxes were also monitored, as were a suite of complementary environmental variables. Night-time CH4 fluxes were significantly greater than daytime fluxes during both campaigns, by 10.4% and 36.1%, respectively. In Campaign 1 air temperature was the best predictor of CH4 fluxes, whereas in Campaign 2 net ecosystem exchange (NEE) values were the best predictor. This study shows that diurnal variations in CH4 fluxes exist in a restored peatland and that current approaches biased to daytime measurements will underestimate CH4 emissions from restored peatlands to the atmosphere.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".