MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2923575468 · doi:10.1029/2019jg005123

Net Ecosystem Carbon Balance of a Peat Bog Undergoing Restoration: Integrating CO<sub>2</sub> and CH<sub>4</sub> Fluxes From Eddy Covariance and Aquatic Evasion With DOC Drainage Fluxes

2019· article· en· W2923575468 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Brenda D’Acunha, Laura Morillas, T. Andrew Black, Andreas Christen, Mark S. Johnson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersBritish Columbia Knowledge Development FundNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsEddy covarianceEnvironmental scienceEcosystemEcosystem respirationPeatDissolved organic carbonHydrology (agriculture)BogPrimary productionWater balanceAtmospheric sciencesEcologyEnvironmental chemistryChemistryGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Peatland ecosystems are generally carbon (C) sinks. However, the role of dissolved organic C (DOC) relative to gaseous fluxes of CO 2 and CH 4 in the C balance of these ecosystems has not often been studied. Dissolved C fluxes are important for understanding C partitioning within the peatland and the potential C drainage from it. This research was conducted in Burns Bog, a heavily impacted ecosystem near Vancouver, Canada, undergoing ecological restoration efforts by rewetting. Here we present data on (i) ecosystem‐scale fluxes of CO 2 (net ecosystem exchange, NEE) and CH 4 (FCH 4 ) determined by eddy covariance, (ii) evasion fluxes of CO 2 and CH 4 from the water surface to estimate the role of open water in ecosystem‐scale fluxes, and (iii) DOC flux (fDOC) in water draining from the peatland. Our results showed that open water areas inside the footprint were a continual C source, emitting 47.0 ± 2.4 g C·m −2 ·year −1 . DOC export (15.6 g C·m −2 ·year −1 ) was significant to the net ecosystem C balance, decreasing the magnitude of the eddy covariance‐determined C balance (i.e., NEE + FCH 4 ) of −45.0 ± 16.8 g C·m −2 ·year −1 by 35%, resulting in a net ecosystem C balance (i.e., NEE + FCH 4 + fDOC) of −29.7 ± 17.0 g C·m −2 ·year −1 . Most of this offset occurred during the wetter nongrowing season when gross primary production was low and fDOC was relatively high.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.593
Threshold uncertainty score0.549

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations45
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research BiogeosciencesSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207