Carbon outwelling and outgassing vs. burial in an estuarine tidal creek surrounded by mangrove and saltmarsh wetlands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Mangrove‐ and saltmarsh‐dominated estuaries have high rates of organic carbon burial. Here, we estimate soil, pore water, and surface‐water carbon fluxes in an Australian estuarine tidal creek to assess whether (1) advective pore water exchange releases some of the soil carbon, (2) outwelling (lateral exports) represents a major carbon sequestration mechanism, and (3) methane emissions offset soil carbon sequestration. A radon ( 222 Rn) mass balance implied tidally driven pore‐water exchange rates ranging from 5.5 ± 3.6 to 15.6 ± 8.1 cm d −1 . Pore water exchange explained most of the dissolved organic carbon (DOC) and methane surface‐water fluxes but not dissolved inorganic carbon (DIC) and alkalinity. Organic carbon burial in soils derived from 239 + 240 Pu dating was 11–63 g C m −2 yr −1 . Methane and carbon dioxide emissions at the water–air interface were 0.27 ± 0.03 and 63 ± 166 mmol m −2 d −1 , respectively. When calculated as CO 2 ‐equivalents, aquatic CH 4 emissions converted to 19–94 g C‐CO 2 m −2 yr −1 . Upscaling methane and soil carbon fluxes to representative areas revealed that CH 4 emissions could offset < 5% of soil carbon burial. DIC outwelling (12 ± 6 mmol m −2 catchment d −1 ) was less than five‐fold greater than DOC and particulate organic carbon (POC) outwelling and four‐fold greater than catchment‐wide carbon burial. Because much of this DIC remains in the ocean after air–water equilibration, lateral DIC exports may represent an important long‐term carbon sink. Recent research has focused on quantifying carbon burial rates in blue carbon habitats such as saltmarshes and mangroves. We suggest that DIC outwelling and methane outgassing should also be considered when assessing the carbon sequestration capacity of these coastal vegetated habitats.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".