MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Perched Peatlands: insights into eco-hydrologic roles of peatlands in water limited boreal environments

2020· article· en· W3092849667 on OpenAlexaff
K. J. Devito, Lindsay M James, Daniel S. Alessi, Kelly Hokanson, Nicholas Kettridge, Mika Little-Devito, C. A. Mendoza

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeatSwampEnvironmental scienceSurface waterBorealHydrology (agriculture)GroundwaterWetlandWater tableSphagnumWater levelEcologyGeologyGeographyEnvironmental engineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peatlands are integral to sustaining landscape eco-hydrological function in water-limited boreal landscapes and serve as important water sources for headwater streams and surrounding forests, and recently for mega-scale watershed construction associated with resource extraction. Despite the regional moisture deficit of the Boreal plains, peatlands and margin swamps exist on topographic highs where low permeability (clogging) layers occur proximal to the surface and are apparently isolated from surface water and local and regional groundwater inputs. The water generating mechanisms (external water sources, internal feedback mechanisms) that enable peatland formation with such delicate water balances in these unique hydrogeologic settings are not well known, and have large implications for understanding the eco-hydrologic role of natural peatlands as well as direct peatland construction in drier boreal landscapes. A multi-year sampling campaign was conducted to collect hydrometric, geochemical (DOC, pH, major cations and anions), and isotopic (D/H, 18O/16O) data from a small isolated peatland-margin swamp complex. We explored the relative roles of margin swamps in buffering water loss and generating perched groundwater, shading and wind protection from adjacent forests, snow redistribution in and around the peatland, and wetland feedbacks on maintenance of peatland moisture and ecosystem function. Long-term (18 year) records of water table gradients between the peatland and an adjacent forest combined with 3 year high intensity <!-- Not sure if you mean to separate the long term data from the high intensity data from Lindsey’s project -->water balance calculations show the peatland to be a source of water to adjacent forests during this period and illustrate the dominance of autogenic wetland feedbacks over allogenic controls (external sources) in peatland development at this location. Contrasts in water storage due to the morphometry <!-- Morphometry? -->of the clogging layer appear to the dominant determinants of peatland and swamp form and function. Layers of decomposed peat and fine textured mineral soils in margin swamps with low water storage potential promoted frequent soil saturation and anoxia, limiting forest vegetation growth and water uptake, further enhancing wetland vegetation, water conservation and generation within the wetland complex. Shading and wind protection from adjacent forests appear to influence soil frost duration and atmospheric demand to further reduce evapotranspiration losses contributing to a slight moisture surplus in the wetland complex relative to the adjacent forest. Understanding the water balance and moisture surplus controls in isolated peatlands sheds light on the relative role of allogenic and autogenic controls on peatlands with implications for: 1) assessing regional eco-hydrological roles of peatland and forestland covers, 2) predicting landscape-scale response to environmental change and land use, and 3) directing landscape scale reclamation or large reconstruction projects over a range of geologic settings in water-limited boreal regions.

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)0.000
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology→French-language works237,207→