MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3115138554 · doi:10.30649/fisheries.v2i2.36

ANALISIS BIOMASSA DAN CADANGAN KARBON PADA EKOSISTEM LAMUN DI DESA TELUK BAKAU KABUPATEN BINTAN

2020· article· id· W3115138554 on OpenAlexaff
Teguh Heriyanto, Bintal Amin, Insaniah Rahimah, Arsanti Arsanti

Bibliographic record

VenueFisheries Jurnal Perikanan dan Ilmu Kelautan · 2020
Typearticle
Languageid
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMarine and Coastal Ecosystems
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceGeologyForestryGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lamun merupakan tumbuhan laut yang mampu menyimpan karbon dalam bentuk biomassa yangdiserap melalui proses fotosintesis, sehingga lamun memainkan peran yang luar biasa dalam mitigasiisu perubahan iklim global. Penelitian ini dilaksanakan pada bulan April 2016. Analisis biomassadan cadangan lamun dilakukan di Laboratorium Kimia Laut, Fakultas Perikanan dan Ilmu Kelautan,Universitas Riau. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa terdapat 6 species lamun pada plot, dimanaspecies terbanyak adalah C. rotundata dan species paling sedikit jumlahnya E. acroides. Nilaibiomassa total dan cadangan karbon total lamun berturut-turut adalah 213,10 ton bk/ha dan 72,46ton C/ha. Cadangan karbon pada ekosistem lamun di lokasi penelitian ini tidak memiliki perbedaansignifikan pada jarak 0 m, 50 m dan 100 m. Tingginya potensi biomassa dan cadangan carbon padaekosistem padang lamun menggambarkan besarnya peran ekosistem ini dalam menanggulangidampak buruk dari pemanasan global dengan cara menyerap karbon dioksida dan menyimpannyadalam bentuk biomassa. Hal ini dapat dijadikan sebagai acuan dalam membuat perencanaan mitigasiisu perubahan iklim global dan kegiatan konservasi pada ekosistem ini.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFisheries Jurnal Perikanan dan Ilmu KelautanSame topicMarine and Coastal EcosystemsFrench-language works237,207