Lowering water table reduces carbon sink strength and carbon stocks in northern peatlands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Peatlands at high latitudes have accumulated >400 Pg carbon (C) because saturated soil and cold temperatures suppress C decomposition. This substantial amount of C in Arctic and Boreal peatlands is potentially subject to increased decomposition if the water table (WT) decreases due to climate change, including permafrost thaw‐related drying. Here, we optimize a version of the Organizing Carbon and Hydrology In Dynamic Ecosystems model (ORCHIDEE‐PCH4) using site‐specific observations to investigate changes in CO 2 and CH 4 fluxes as well as C stock responses to an experimentally manipulated decrease of WT at six northern peatlands. The unmanipulated control peatlands, with the WT <20 cm on average (seasonal max up to 45 cm) below the surface, currently act as C sinks in most years (58 ± 34 g C m −2 year −1 ; including 6 ± 7 g C–CH 4 m −2 year −1 emission). We found, however, that lowering the WT by 10 cm reduced the CO 2 sink by 13 ± 15 g C m −2 year −1 and decreased CH 4 emission by 4 ± 4 g CH 4 m −2 year −1 , thus accumulating less C over 100 years (0.2 ± 0.2 kg C m −2 ). Yet, the reduced emission of CH 4 , which has a larger greenhouse warming potential, resulted in a net decrease in greenhouse gas balance by 310 ± 360 g CO 2‐eq m −2 year −1 . Peatlands with the initial WT close to the soil surface were more vulnerable to C loss: Non‐permafrost peatlands lost >2 kg C m −2 over 100 years when WT is lowered by 50 cm, while permafrost peatlands temporally switched from C sinks to sources. These results highlight that reductions in C storage capacity in response to drying of northern peatlands are offset in part by reduced CH 4 emissions, thus slightly reducing the positive carbon climate feedbacks of peatlands under a warmer and drier future climate scenario.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".