MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3120427812 · doi:10.1029/2020gb006717

Spatially Resolved Measurements in Tropical Reservoirs Reveal Elevated Methane Ebullition at River Inflows and at High Productivity

2021· article· en· W3120427812 on OpenAlexaff
Annika Linkhorst, José R. Paranaíba, Raquel Mendonça, David Rudberg, Tonya DelSontro, Nathan Barros, Sebastian Sobek

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Biogeochemical Cycles · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersFP7 Ideas: European Research CouncilFundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de Minas GeraisCoordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)TropicsMethaneProductivityHypolimnionAtmospheric sciencesEutrophicationGeologyNutrientEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An increasing number of rivers is being dammed, particularly in the tropics, and reservoir water surfaces can be a substantial anthropogenic source of greenhouse gases. On average, 80% of the CO 2 ‐equivalent emission of reservoirs globally has been attributed to CH 4 , which is predominantly emitted via ebullition. Since ebullition is highly variable across space and time, both measuring and upscaling to an entire reservoir is challenging, and estimates of reservoir CH 4 emission are therefore not well constrained. We measured CH 4 ebullition at high spatial resolution with an echosounder and bubble traps in two reservoirs of different use (water storage and hydropower), size and productivity in the tropical Brazilian Atlantic Rainforest biome. Based on the spatially most well‐resolved whole‐reservoir ebullition measurements in the tropics so far, we found that mean CH 4 ebullition was twice as high in river inflow areas as in other parts of the reservoirs, and more than 4 times higher in the eutrophic compared to the oligotrophic reservoir. Using different upscaling approaches rendered similar whole‐reservoir CH 4 ebullition estimates, suggesting that highly spatially‐resolved measurements may be more important for constraining reservoir‐wide CH 4 estimates than choice of upscaling approach. The minimum sampling effort was high (>250 and >1,700 thirty‐meter segments of hydroacoustic survey to reach within 50% or 80% accuracy, respectively). This suggests that traditional manual bubble‐trap measurements should be abandoned in favor of highly resolved measurements in order to get spatially representative estimates of CH 4 ebullition, which accounted for 60% and 99% of total C emission in the two studied reservoirs.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.160
Threshold uncertainty score0.964

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations28
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Biogeochemical CyclesSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207