MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4220747951 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu22-9887

Carbon and Greenhouse gas dynamics at an industrial cutaway peatland

2022· preprint· en· W4220747951 on OpenAlexaff
Ruchita Ingle, Matthew Saunders

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsTrinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeatGreenhouse gasEnvironmental scienceEcosystemCarbon dioxideChemistryEnvironmental chemistryAnimal scienceEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Worldwide, peatlands are estimated to store around 30% of soil organic carbon on only 3% of the land area. In Ireland, these numbers increase with peatlands covering ~20% of the land area and storing up to 75% of the terrestrial soil organic carbon. However, a large proportion (≥90%) of these ecosystems have been degraded through drainage for agriculture, forestry, horticulture and extraction for energy. With the increase in global initiatives for the conservation, rehabilitation and sustainable management of peatland, further investigation of the effect of drainage and rehabilitation is needed to better understand the carbon and greenhouse gas (GHG) dynamics of these ecosystems. Additionally, it is crucial to understand the natural adaptive capacity of the ecosystem to further inform effective rehabilitation strategies. This study investigated the carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) fluxes from a former industrial peat extraction site in Ireland, prior to rehabilitation using static chamber techniques. The site is an overall source of CO2, releasing a cumulative annual flux of 9 g C-CO2 m-2 y-1 for 2020-2021 and a small source of methane, releasing an average annual cumulative total of 1 g C-CH4 m-2 y-1. This research highlights the potential emissions savings that can be made through rehabilitation as water tables increase with rewetting and these sites become re-vegetated. However, long-term measurements to track the temporal dynamics of C/GHG emissions post-rehabilitation are required to fully assess the climate mitigation of this approach, particularly in light of a changing climate which might further influence the ecological, hydrological, and biogeochemical functions of these important 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 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)0.000
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.213 · 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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