MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2886875409 · doi:10.5539/jas.v10n9p153

Spatial Distribution of Soil Organic Carbon in Amazonia

2018· article· en· W2886875409 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
G. F. Franco, José João Lelis Leal de Souza, André Luiz Lopes de Faria, Milton César Costa Campos, Liovando Marciano da Costa

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Agricultural Science · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmazon rainforestEnvironmental scienceSoil carbonTotal organic carbonSpatial distributionCarbon fibersSpatial variabilityRainforestEcosystemVegetation (pathology)Soil waterSoil scienceEnvironmental chemistryEcologyGeographyChemistryRemote sensingMathematicsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Amazon rainforest is considered the most important ecosystem in the world for the global carbon balance due to its high carbon storage in soil and in the vegetation. Unfortunately, there are few studies about organic fraction of its soils. Thus, the present research aimed to quantify the soil organic carbon content (OC) and to analyze its spatial distribution using 701 soil samples from minimally anthropic areas compiled from previous studies. Descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation and spatial variability analyses of OC and other physical and chemical soil data were performed. The high variability of OC between soil groups were attributed to the preservation and protection of carbon by oxides, reduction process and organic-rich parent material. OC was strongly positively correlated with total nitrogen (N) content, C:N ratio and cation exchange capacity at pH 7.0. The maps produced showing the spatial distribution of CO and that based on C:N ratio would be support for the creation of priority areas in the conservation of ecosystem.

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)0.001
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 score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Agricultural Science→Same topicSoil Carbon and Nitrogen Dynamics→French-language works237,207→