MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3201196918 · doi:10.1002/essoar.10505652.1

North American Swamps: What Lies Beneath

2020· article· en· W3201196918 on OpenAlexafffund
Sarah A. Finkelstein, Emily Daze, Eunji Byun, Dean Hiler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsSwampWorld Wide WebComputer scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Terrestrial wetlands are a highly significant carbon reservoir in North America. Forested wetlands, or swamps, are an important category of North American wetland and include boreal forested peatlands, swamps dominated by needle-leaved trees including Thuja (cedar), Picea (Spruce), Larix (Tamarack) or Taxodium (bald cypress), swamps dominated by broad-leaved trees or shrubs including Fraxinus (Ash), Ulmus (Elm), or Acer (Maple), as well as mangroves. The Second State of the Carbon Cycle Report estimates that forested wetlands may make up ~55% of the total terrestrial wetland area for North America, although estimates vary considerably due to different mapping conventions and classification systems across national and provincial borders, and also due to the ongoing impacts of land use change. Additionally, that report suggests that forested wetlands contain larger total carbon pools than non-forested wetlands, and that forested wetlands effect 53% of the estimated 123 Tg total wetland annual carbon sink for North America. Uncertainties in the sizes of the forested wetland soil carbon pools continue to be significant due in part to insufficient data on variabilities in carbon densities across diverse swamp types. Further, there are limited data on the rates of vertical accretion of swamp soils and the associated long-term rates of carbon accumulation, needed for better predicting impacts of climate warming on carbon sequestration in swamp soils. We present here a comparative synthesis of swamp soil carbon properties including bulk densities, organic carbon contents, soil thicknesses, rates of vertical accretion and rates of long-term carbon accumulation, from >200 swamp sites. We compare these properties for broad-leaf swamps (including mangroves), needle-leaf swamps, mixed swamps, and shrub-dominated swamps, and also compare across North American Ecoregions. The results show significant variability across peat-forming and mineral swamps, and indicate rates of carbon accumulation in some swamp types similar to those of northern bogs and fens.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.089
Threshold uncertainty score0.177

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.194 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology→French-language works237,207→