MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386278603 · doi:10.1088/1748-9326/acf50b

Tundra fire increases the likelihood of methane hotspot formation in the Yukon–Kuskokwim Delta, Alaska, USA

2023· article· en· W4386278603 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elizabeth Yoseph, Elizabeth Hoy, Clayton D. Elder, S. Ludwig, David R. Thompson, Charles E. Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Letters · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicClimate change and permafrost
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
KeywordsTundraPermafrostEnvironmental scienceHotspot (geology)ArcticPhysical geographyGreenhouse gasFire regimeAtmospheric sciencesCarbon cycleClimatologyDeltaEcologyGeologyEcosystemGeographyOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Rapid warming in Arctic tundra may lead to drier soils in summer and greater lightning ignition rates, likely culminating in enhanced wildfire risk. Increased wildfire frequency and intensity leads to greater conversion of permafrost carbon to greenhouse gas emissions. Here, we quantify the effect of recent tundra fires on the creation of methane (CH 4 ) emission hotspots, a fingerprint of the permafrost carbon feedback. We utilized high-resolution (∼25 m 2 pixels) and broad coverage (1780 km 2 ) airborne imaging spectroscopy and maps of historical wildfire-burned areas to determine whether CH 4 hotspots were more likely in areas burned within the last 50 years in the Yukon–Kuskokwim Delta, Alaska, USA. Our observations provide a unique observational constraint on CH 4 dynamics, allowing us to map CH 4 hotspots in relation to individual burn events, burn scar perimeters, and proximity to water. We find that CH 4 hotspots are roughly 29% more likely on average in tundra that burned within the last 50 years compared to unburned areas and that this effect is nearly tripled along burn scar perimeters that are delineated by surface water features. Our results indicate that the changes following tundra fire favor the complex environmental conditions needed to generate CH 4 emission hotspots. We conclude that enhanced CH 4 emissions following tundra fire represent a positive feedback that will accelerate climate warming, tundra fire occurrence, and future permafrost carbon loss to the atmosphere.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.079
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.229 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations14
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research LettersSame topicClimate change and permafrostFrench-language works237,207