MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387736997 · doi:10.1029/2023wr035398

Controls on Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity in a Degrading Permafrost Peatland Complex

2023· article· en· W4387736997 on OpenAlexaff
Richard E. Fewster, Paul J. Morris, Graeme T. Swindles, Andy J. Baird, T. Edward Turner, Ruza Ivanovic

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Resources Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersNatural Environment Research CouncilSight Research UKLeverhulme TrustQuaternary Research Association
KeywordsPeatPermafrostBorealMireHydraulic conductivityBogEnvironmental scienceBulk densitySoil scienceGeologyHydrology (agriculture)Temperate climateEcologySoil waterGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Permafrost peatlands are vulnerable to rapid structural changes under climatic warming, including vertical collapse. Peatland water budgets, and therefore peat hydraulic properties, are important determinants of vegetation and carbon fluxes. Measurements of hydraulic properties exist for only a limited number of permafrost peatland locations, primarily concentrated in North America. The impacts of thaw‐induced collapse upon properties such as horizontal saturated hydraulic conductivity (Kh), and thus lateral drainage, remain poorly understood. We made laboratory determinations of Kh from 82 peat samples from a degrading Swedish palsa mire. We fitted a linear mixed‐effects model (LMM) to establish the controls on Kh, which declined strongly with increasing depth, humification and dry bulk density. Depth exerted the strongest control on Kh in our LMM, which demonstrated strong predictive performance (r2 = 0.605). Humification and dry bulk density were influential predictors, but the high collinearity of these two variables meant only one could be included reliably in our LMM. Surprisingly, peat Kh did not differ significantly between desiccating and collapsed palsas. We compared our site‐specific LMM to an existing, multi‐site model, fitted primarily to boreal and temperate peatlands. The multi‐site model made less skillful predictions (r2 = 0.528) than our site‐specific model, possibly due to latitudinal differences in peat compaction, floristic composition and climate. Nonetheless, low bias means the multi‐site model may still be useful for estimating peat Kh at high latitudes. Permafrost peatlands remain underrepresented in multi‐site models of peat hydraulic properties, and measurements such as ours could be used to improve future iterations.

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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.336
Teacher spread0.247 · 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

Citations9
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater Resources ResearchSame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207