Hydrobiogeochemical Controls on the Delivery of Dissolved Organic Matter to Boreal Headwater Streams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Understanding controls on the delivery of dissolved organic matter (DOM) from terrestrial to aquatic systems is key for constraining carbon balances and fluxes in boreal headwater catchments. The largest export of DOM generally occurs during intense periods of water delivery to the landscape (e.g., rain events); however, the timing and magnitude of DOM is complicated by geomorphological, hydrometeorological, and biogeochemical variability. To better assess mechanisms controlling the delivery of DOM to boreal streams, DOM was investigated in two morphologically distinct catchments of an experimental forest watershed in western Newfoundland, one dominated by low relief wetlands and the other by steep hillslopes. The DOM was compared during two fall storms of similar magnitude but contrasting moisture conditions during the autumn transition. Variable concentrations and optical character highlighted antecedent conditions are important for the delivery of DOM to boreal streams. Concentration‐discharge relationships with stream hydrograph separation analysis suggest preferential flowpaths through shallow mineral horizons as a key pathway for delivery of DOM in the hillslope dominated catchment compared to rapid input from near‐stream wetlands in the low relief catchment. Loss of DOM via preferential pathways suggests an additional mechanism for surface soil carbon loss not directly informed by lateral flow and soil hydrology, which has important implications for our conceptualization and modeling of carbon fluxes in boreal systems. These results suggest watershed scale responses of DOM in boreal headwater catchments are complex, and better linkages between catchment scale hydrology and landscape hydrobiogeochemistry are required to constrain terrestrial to aquatic carbon fluxes in boreal landscapes.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".