Variability of blue carbon storage in arid evaporitic environment of two coastal Sabkhas or mudflats
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Coastal Sabkhas are mudflats found in arid coastal regions that are located within the supratidal zone when high rates of evaporation lead to high salinity. While evaporitic minerals often accumulate underneath the surface, the microbial mats are present on the surface of Sabkhas. Coastal Sabkha, an under-studied ecosystem in Qatar, has the potential to store blue carbon. In the present study, we investigated the carbon storage capacity of two Sabkhas from contrasting geological backgrounds. The spatial and temporal variabilities of the carbon stocks were examined. The results showed that both studied Sabkhas exhibit a considerable potential for soil carbon storage with carbon stocks of 109.11 ± 7.07 Mg C ha−1 and 67.77 ± 18.10 Mg C ha−1 in Dohat Faishakh and Khor al Adaid Sabkha respectively. These values fall within the reported range for carbon stocks in coastal Sabkhas in the region (51–194 Mg C ha−1). Interestingly, the carbon stocks in the sediments of the Sabkhas were higher than those in the sediments of Qatari mangroves (50.17 ± 6.27 Mg C ha−1). These finding suggest that coastal Sabkhas can serve as blue carbon ecosystems in arid environments.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".