MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4376637642 · doi:10.1139/cjfr-2022-0326

Evaluating the use of Ca/Sr and <sup>87</sup>Sr/<sup>86</sup>Sr ratios to track Ca sources in sugar maple in Ontario

2023· article· en· W4376637642 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
T. H. Nguyen, Shaun A. Watmough, Duc Huy Dang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Forest Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHeavy metals in environment
Canadian institutionsTrent University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWeatheringSoil waterMapleMineralogyAceraceaeSugarChemistryEnvironmental chemistryGeologyBotanySoil scienceGeochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Decades of acidic deposition and timber harvesting have depleted calcium (Ca) stocks in soils, especially at base-poor soils characterized by low base cation weathering rates. One approach to tracking Ca sources from soil is by using Ca/Sr ratios in vegetation, while 87Sr/86Sr ratios have also been used to estimate mineral weathering rates. To evaluate the uses of Ca/Sr ratios and Sr isotopes in identifying Ca sources in sugar maple ( Acer saccharum Marsh.) trees, three base-poor sites on the Canadian Shield and three limestone sites in southern Ontario were sampled for Ca, Sr, and 87Sr/86Sr ratios. Higher Ca/Sr ratios in soil extracts and sugar maple tissues at base-rich sites compared with base-poor sites reflect different minerology among regions, while the Ca/Sr discrimination factor between roots and foliage indicated that internal cycling exerts a major control on Ca/Sr ratios in sugar maple. At the three off-shield sites, 87Sr/86Sr ratios in soil and tree tissues were higher than precipitation but were indistinguishable for off-shield sites. Mixing models using a 1.0 mol L−1 HCl soil extract as the weathering endmember indicated that a lower proportion of weathering Ca compared with other geochemical approaches. One potential explanation is that the extraction method dissolves more recalcitrant minerals to a greater extent than under field conditions, leading to a higher weathering rate endmember value used in the mixing model.

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)0.001
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.116

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.167
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.190 · 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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Forest ResearchSame topicHeavy metals in environmentFrench-language works237,207