Emerging forest–peatland bistability and resilience of European peatland carbon stores
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Northern peatlands store large amounts of carbon. Observations indicate that forests and peatlands in northern biomes can be alternative stable states for a range of landscape settings. Climatic and hydrological changes may reduce the resilience of peatlands and forests, induce persistent shifts between these states, and release the carbon stored in peatlands. Here, we present a dynamic simulation model constrained and validated by a wide set of observations to quantify how feedbacks in water and carbon cycling control resilience of both peatlands and forests in northern landscapes. Our results show that 34% of Europe (area) has a climate that can currently sustain existing rainwater-fed peatlands (raised bogs). However, raised bog initiation and restoration by water conservation measures after the original peat soil has disappeared is only possible in 10% of Europe where the climate allows raised bogs to initiate and outcompete forests. Moreover, in another 10% of Europe, existing raised bogs (concerning ∼20% of the European raised bogs) are already affected by ongoing climate change. Here, forests may overgrow peatlands, which could potentially release in the order of 4% (∼24 Pg carbon) of the European soil organic carbon pool. Our study demonstrates quantitatively that preserving and restoring peatlands requires looking beyond peatland-specific processes and taking into account wider landscape-scale feedbacks with forest ecosystems.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".