Bog surface oscillation (mire breathing): A useful measure in raised bog restoration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Oscillation of the peat surface is an important mechanism for hydrological self‐regulation in bogs. As the water table rises in the wet season, the peat body expands, raising the bog surface and increasing water storage. With seasonal drying, the water table declines, the peat loses volume, and the bog surface drops, thereby keeping Sphagnum mosses in close contact with the water table. The oscillation of surface elevation in a Pacific coastal temperate raised bog was monitored at multiple sites for 4–12 years in 8 different plant communities of both peat‐harvested and unharvested sites to determine how bog surface oscillation relates to site conditions. The multiyear averages of bog surface oscillation for the different sites ranged from 2 to 34 cm (mean: 10.8 cm). In harvested sites, surface oscillation was linked to a larger water level amplitude and a shallower water table. In unharvested sites, a shallow water table was also a strong predictor of surface oscillation, but water level amplitude was negatively correlated to surface oscillation. This discrepancy was attributed to rewetting and regeneration of harvested sites, as well as historic drainage in many of the unharvested sites that reduced the elasticity of the peat. Surface oscillation differed significantly between some of the plant communities, generally between drier and wetter sites. In disturbed bogs, regeneration of a more elastic surface peat can increase the magnitude of peat volume change and bring about the return of self‐regulating mechanisms. Bog surface oscillation may be an important metric for assessing the restoration success or storage capacity of raised bogs in similar climatic settings.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".