MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3200228180 · doi:10.1029/2021gb007058

Canadian Arctic Archipelago Shelf‐Ocean Interactions: A Major Iron Source to Pacific Derived Waters Transiting to the Atlantic

2021· article· en· W3200228180 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Manuel Colombo, Birgit Rogalla, Jingxuan Li, Susan E. Allen, Kristin J. Orians, María T. Maldonado

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Biogeochemical Cycles · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of British ColumbiaCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsOceanographyArchipelagoArcticBayGeologyContinental shelfSedimentSound (geography)Arctic dipole anomalyEnvironmental scienceArctic ice packPaleontology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Continental shelves are important sources of iron (Fe) in the land‐dominated Arctic Ocean. To understand the export of Fe from the Arctic to Baffin Bay (BB) and the North Atlantic, we studied the alteration of the Fe signature in waters transiting the Canadian Arctic Archipelago (CAA). During its transit through the CAA, inflowing Arctic Waters from the Canada Basin become enriched in Fe as result of strong sediment resuspension and enhanced sediment‐water interactions (non‐reductive dissolution). These high Fe waters are exported to BB, where approximately 10.7 kt of Fe are delivered yearly from Lancaster Sound. Furthermore, if the two remaining main CAA pathways (Jones Sound and Nares Strait) are included, this shelf environment would be a dominant source term of Fe (dFe + pFe: 26–90 kt y −1 ) to Baffin Bay. The conservative Fe flux estimate (26 kt y −1 ) is 1.7–38 times greater than atmospheric inputs, and may be crucial in supporting primary production and nitrogen fixation in BB and beyond.

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 score0.358
Threshold uncertainty score0.843

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.188 · 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

Citations23
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Biogeochemical CyclesSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207