MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2958228867 · doi:10.5194/bg-16-2651-2019

Wildfire overrides hydrological controls on boreal peatland methane emissions

2019· article· en· W2958228867 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Scott J. Davidson, Christine van Beest, Richard M. Petrone, Maria Strack

Bibliographic record

VenueBiogeosciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada's Oil Sands Innovation AllianceShell CanadaSuncor Energy Incorporated
KeywordsPeatBorealEnvironmental scienceGreenhouse gasWater tableClimate changeHydrology (agriculture)TaigaMethanePhysical geographyAtmospheric sciencesEcologyForestryGeographyGeologyGroundwater

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract. Boreal peatlands represent a globally important store of carbon, and disturbances such as wildfire can have a negative feedback to the climate. Understanding how carbon exchange and greenhouse gas (GHG) dynamics are impacted after a wildfire is important, especially as boreal peatlands may be vulnerable to changes in wildfire regime under a rapidly changing climate. However, given this vulnerability, there is very little in the literature on the impact such fires have on methane (CH4) emissions. This study investigated the effect of wildfire on CH4 emissions at a boreal fen near Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada, that was partially burned by the Horse River Wildfire in 2016. We measured CH4 emissions and environmental variables (2017–2018) and CH4 production potential (2018) in two different microform types (hummocks and hollows) across a peat burn severity gradient (unburned (UB), moderately burned (MB), and severely burned (SB)). Results indicated a switch in the typical understanding of boreal peatland CH4 emissions. For example, emissions were significantly lower in the MB and SB hollows in both years compared to UB hollows. Interestingly, across the burned sites, hummocks had higher fluxes in 2017 than hollows at the MB and SB sites. We found typically higher emissions at the UB site where the water table was close to the surface. However, at the burned sites, no relationship was found between CH4 emissions and water table, even under similar hydrological conditions. There was also significantly higher CH4 production potential from the UB site than the burned sites. The reduction in CH4 emissions and production in the hollows at burned sites highlights the sensitivity of hollows to fire, removing labile organic material for potential methanogenesis. The previously demonstrated resistance of hummocks to fire also results in limited impact on CH4 emissions and likely faster recovery to pre-fire rates. Given the potential initial net cooling effect resulting from a reduction in CH4 emissions, it is important that the radiative effect of all GHGs following wildfire across peatlands is taken into account.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.075
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.227 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations20
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBiogeosciencesSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207