MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3206826871 · doi:10.1029/2021jg006507

Tidal Marsh Sediment and Carbon Accretion on a Geomorphologically Dynamic Coastline

2021· article· en· W3206826871 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lee B. van Ardenne, JD Hughes, Gail L. Chmura

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityUniversity of the Fraser Valley
FundersTula Foundation
KeywordsMarshAccretion (finance)Salt marshSedimentHydrology (agriculture)GeologyEnvironmental scienceBrackish marshOceanographySedimentationPhysical geographyGeomorphologyBrackish waterGeographyEcologyWetland

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We examined the sediment profiles, surface accretion rates, and soil carbon (C) accumulation rates of two brackish tidal marshes on Kilbella and Wannock Rivers of the central coast of British Columbia, Canada, a region where such tidal marsh studies are rare. Sediment grain size is variable within these deposits and is a significant predictor of soil C density. The average soil C density of the Kilbella (0.027 ± 0.01 g C cm−³) and the Wannock marsh (0.029 ± 0.007 g C cm−³) are within the range of reported global averages. Compared to global estimates, the depth weighted mean rates of soil C accumulation are low, between 29 and 50 g C m−2 year−1, although high sectional rates (up to 490 ± 230 g C m−³ year−1) occur in deeper segments of the marsh profile at Kilbella. Modern accretion rates are below moderate to high sea level rise scenarios. The Kilbella marsh contains sand layers from periods of mass sedimentation events (landslides and tsunamis), which provide the marsh with elevation capital that can be critical to its sustainability. The Kilbella profile demonstrates that variation in carbon density with depth cannot be predicted in marshes on geomorphologically dynamic coasts.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research BiogeosciencesSame topicCoastal wetland ecosystem dynamicsFrench-language works237,207