MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323041469 · doi:10.1139/er-2022-0034

Progress in understanding the methane sink and methanotrophs in karst caves

2023· article· en· W4323041469 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Weijun Luo, Likai Hao, Shijie Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Reviews · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicrobial Community Ecology and Physiology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCaveKarstEcologyContext (archaeology)Earth scienceEnvironmental scienceGeographyBiologyGeologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Karst caves are considered sinks for atmospheric CH4 due to their sub-atmospheric CH4 concentrations. Isotopic and molecular analyses suggest that methanotrophic bacteria ( MOB) play an important role in consumption of CH4 in caves. Previous research has established that the biogeographic patterns of microorganisms exist widely and is created and maintained by different ecological processes. Considering the great potential of cave MOB in CH4 oxidation, understanding the assembly and working mechanisms will have practical implications for understanding and utilizing cave ecological resources. In this review, we have summarized the information collected thus far on CH4 sources and sinks in caves, MOB phylogeny, and MOB ecophysiology. We applied this knowledge to discuss the factors that may influence the composition and distribution of cave MOB communities in the context of karst geology. Finally, we review the relevant methods and theories and discuss the opportunities and challenges involved in the predictive description of microbial processes of cave CH4 consumption.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental ReviewsSame topicMicrobial Community Ecology and PhysiologyFrench-language works237,207