MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4293247668 · doi:10.1111/rec.13714

Reestablishment of peatland vegetation following surface leveling of decommissioned in situ oil mining infrastructures

2022· article· en· W4293247668 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Meike Lemmer, Bin Xu, Maria Strack, Line Rochefort

Bibliographic record

VenueRestoration Ecology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooNorthern Alberta Institute of TechnologyUniversité LavalCenter for Northern Studies
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPeatRevegetationEnvironmental scienceSphagnumVegetation (pathology)WetlandCarexRestoration ecologyHydrology (agriculture)Land reclamationEcologyGeologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peatland ecosystem restoration following oil mining activities in Alberta, Canada, aims at reestablishing crucial peatland functions, such as wildlife habitat, water storage and filtration, peat accumulation, and carbon sequestration. To reinstate peatland functions, characteristic hydrological conditions are necessary to support the establishment and growth of characteristic wetland vegetation. Following in situ oil sands well pad disturbances in the Peace River and Cold Lake Oil Sands regions in Alberta, we evaluated the efficiency of peatland restoration approaches including different groundwork and revegetation techniques. Groundwork techniques included the complete removal (CR) or partial removal (PR) of the former in situ well pads' mineral fill and revegetation included the spontaneous revegetation via natural ingress of diaspores from nearby peatlands, or managed revegetation via planting of Carex aquatilis , Larix laricina , and Salix lutea . We assessed the plant species composition, biochemical and hydrological properties of all study areas, including restored peatland areas, an unrestored area, and reference areas (REF) for comparison. Ten years post‐restoration, in the restored areas the mean total plant cover was 57% with an average of 35 vascular plant and bryophyte species, while in REF 68% mean total plant cover and an average of 64 plant species were recorded. Respectively, characteristic peatland species contributed to 61 and 100% of the species composition. PR and hydrological connection to the adjacent peatland resulted in near surface water table and the highest peatland plant species diversity, while CR promoted the formation of a shallow open water area.

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)0.001
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 score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.478

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations10
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRestoration EcologySame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207