MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3167388779 · doi:10.1002/essoar.10501495.1

Carbon accumulation in freshwater marsh soils: A synthesis for temperate North America

2019· article· en· W3167388779 on OpenAlexaff
Amanda L. Loder, Sarah A. Finkelstein

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarshWetlandEnvironmental scienceSoil carbonTemperate climateCarbon cycleSoil waterBogBlue carbonPeatTotal organic carbonEcologyEcosystemCarbon fibersCarbon sequestrationHydrology (agriculture)Soil scienceGeologyBiologyCarbon dioxide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peatland soils are of great interest for study and management because of their high carbon contents and known role in the global carbon cycle. However, carbon stocks have yet to be constrained in many wetland ecosystems. Relative to bogs, fens and saline coastal ecosystems, less is known about carbon stocks in freshwater marsh soils despite their global prevalence, and it is not well understood how disturbance of freshwater marshes may affect carbon-climate dynamics. To better understand the potential for freshwater marshes to be net carbon sinks, we review how freshwater marshes and associated soils are classified, and synthesize available data on short- and long-term rates of carbon accumulation in freshwater marsh soils in temperate North America. Although often described as mineral-based, our findings suggest that freshwater marshes are not restricted to mineral substrates, and that inconsistencies in classification may underestimate presumed carbon stocks. Organic carbon contents and bulk density measurements are highly variable, and can range between 1-45% and 0.04-1.5 g cm-3, respectively. Moreover, rates of carbon accumulation in freshwater marshes are often measured over recent time scales (50-100 years; on average 155 +/- 74 g C m-2 yr-1), while long-term rates (measured over centuries and millennia; on average 51 +/- 38 g C m-2 yr-1) are much more scarce. We suspect that short-term rates are markedly greater than long-term rates of carbon accumulation because they do not account for long-term carbon loss and may reflect large increases in sedimentation since European settlement in North America. However, we also suspect that long-term carbon storage in freshwater marsh soils is underestimated, and that freshwater marshes can have long-term rates of carbon accumulation similar to those reported for temperate peatlands. In this presentation, we will show that variability of rates of carbon accumulation, rates of sediment accretion, bulk density and organic carbon content in freshwater marshes needs to be better constrained in order to accurately quantify their regional and global carbon pools. We will discuss the importance for scientists to specify timeframes over which they are measuring rates of carbon accumulation so that the capacity for wetlands to be net carbon sinks can be correctly understood.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0090.010
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.208 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamicsFrench-language works237,207