MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794435112 · doi:10.1002/ecy.2159

A Canadian upland forest soil profile and carbon stocks database

2018· article· en· W2794435112 on OpenAlexaffabout
Cindy Shaw, A. B. Hilger, Michelle Filiatrault, Werner A. Kurz

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Sport Centre PacificCanadian Forest Service
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoil carbonEnvironmental scienceSoil horizonSiltSoil scienceUSDA soil taxonomySoil surveySoil texturePeatSoil organic matterHydrology (agriculture)DatabaseForestrySoil waterSoil classificationEcologyGeologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"A Canadian upland forest soil profile and carbon stocks database" was compiled in phases over a period of 10 years to address various questions related to modeling upland forest soil carbon in a national forest carbon accounting model. For 3,253 pedons, the SITES table contains estimates for soil organic carbon stocks (Mg/ha) in organic horizons and mineral horizons to a 100-cm depth, soil taxonomy, leading tree species, mean annual temperature, annual precipitation, province or territory, terrestrial ecozone, and latitude and longitude, with an assessment of the quality of information about location. The PROFILES table contains profile data (16,167 records by horizon) used to estimate the carbon stocks that appear in the SITES table, plus additional soil chemical and physical data, where provided by the data source. The exceptions to this are estimates for soil carbon stocks based on Canadian National Forest Inventory data (NFI [2006] in REFERENCES table), where data were collected by depth increment rather than horizon and, therefore, total soil carbon stocks were calculated separately before being entered into the SITES table. Data in the PROFILES table include the carbon stock estimate for each horizon (corrected for coarse fragment content), and the data used to calculate the carbon stock estimate, such as horizon thickness, bulk density, and percent organic carbon. The PROFILES table also contains data, when reported by the source, for percent carbonate carbon, pH, percent total nitrogen, particle size distribution (percent sand, silt, clay), texture class, exchangeable cations, cation and total exchange capacity, and percent Fe and Al. An additional table provides references (REFERENCES table) for the source data. Earlier versions of the database were used to develop national soil carbon modeling categories based on differences in carbon stocks linked to soil taxonomy and to examine the potential of using soil taxonomy and leading tree species to improve accuracy in modeled predictions. The current database is being used to develop soil carbon model parameters linked to soil taxonomy and leading tree species and, by various governmental and nongovernmental organizations, to improve digital mapping of ecosite types and soil properties regionally, nationally, and internationally. © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2018. Information contained in this publication or product may be reproduced, in part or in whole, and by any means, for personal or public non-commercial purposes, without charge or further permission, unless otherwise specified. You are asked to: exercise due diligence in ensuring the accuracy of the materials reproduced; indicate the complete title of the materials reproduced, and the name of the author organization; indicate that the reproduction is a copy of an official work that is published by Natural Resources Canada (NRCan) and that the reproduction has not been produced in affiliation with, or with the endorsement of, NRCan. Commercial reproduction and distribution is prohibited except with written permission from NRCan. For more information, contact NRCan at copyright.droitdauteur@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.187

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0110.023
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.007

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations16
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcologySame topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen DynamicsFrench-language works237,207