Dynamic modeling of organic carbon fates in lake ecosystems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lakes are active processors of organic carbon (OC) and play important roles in landscape and global carbon cycling. Allochthonous OC loads from the landscape, along with autochthonous OC loads from primary production, are mineralized in lakes, buried in lake sediments, and exported via surface or groundwater outflows. Although these processes provide a basis for a conceptual understanding of lake OC budgets, few studies have integrated these fluxes under a dynamic modeling framework to examine their interactions and relative magnitudes. We developed a simple, dynamic mass balance model for OC, and applied the model to a set of five lakes. We examined the relative magnitudes of OC fluxes and found that long-term (>10 year) lake OC dynamics were predominantly driven by allochthonous loads in four of the five lakes, underscoring the importance of terrestrially-derived OC in northern lake ecosystems. Our model highlighted seasonal patterns in lake OC budgets, with increasing water temperatures and lake productivity throughout the growing season corresponding to a transition from burial- to respiration-dominated OC fates. Ratios of respiration to burial, however, were also mediated by the source (autochthonous vs. allochthonous) of total OC loads. Autochthonous OC is more readily respired and may therefore proportionally reduce burial under a warming climate, but allochthonous OC may increase burial due to changes in precipitation. The ratios of autochthonous to allochthonous inputs and respiration to burial demonstrate the importance of dynamic models for examining both the seasonal and inter-annual roles of lakes in landscape and global carbon cycling, particularly in a global change context. Finally, we highlighted critical data needs, which include surface water DOC observations in paired tributary and lake systems, measurements of OC burial rates, groundwater input volume and DOC, and budgets of particulate OC.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".