<scp>Size‐based</scp> characterization of freshwater dissolved organic matter finds similarities within a waterbody type across different Canadian ecozones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Dissolved organic matter (DOM) represents a mixture of organic molecules that vary due to different source materials and degree of processing. Characterizing how DOM composition evolves along the aquatic continuum can be difficult. Using a size‐exclusion chromatography technique (liquid chromatography‐organic carbon detection [LC‐OCD]), we assessed the variability in DOM composition from both surface and groundwaters across a number of Canadian ecozones (mean annual temperature spanning −10°C to +6°C). A wide range in DOM concentration was found from 0.2 to 120 mg C L −1 . Proportions of different size‐based groupings across ecozones were variable, yet similarities between specific waterbody types, regardless of location, suggest commonality in the processes dictating DOM composition. A principal component analysis identified 70% of the variation in LC‐OCD derived DOM compositions could be explained by the waterbody type. We find that DOM composition within a specific waterbody type is similar regardless of the differences in climate or surrounding vegetation where the sample originated from.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".