Effect of hydrogeomorphic setting on calcareous fen hydrology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Calcareous fens are species‐rich peatlands that are dependent on minerotrophic water sources for wetland functioning, with current conceptual models suggesting the water source is ubiquitously groundwater upwelling. By quantifying the water balance and subsurface water flow paths and fluxes over 3 growing seasons for calcareous fens in 3 different hydrogeomorphic settings (Riparian, Trough, and Basin), we show evidence that challenges this conceptual model. The Riparian Fen received an order of magnitude more water inputs than the Trough or Basin Fens and was dominated by stream recharge inputs and groundwater outputs. Precipitation and evaporation dominated the water balance of the Trough Fen whereas only the Basin Fen received sizeable groundwater inputs. Indeed, subsurface water fluxes were low at all fens due to weak hydraulic gradients and low saturated hydraulic conductivity in some areas of each wetland, though variations in growing season precipitation led to subsurface flow reversals in all 3 fens. Our results demonstrate the importance of understanding landscape position, or hydrogeomorphic setting, on calcareous fen hydrology for improving conservation, management, and restoration efforts of these important ecosystems.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".