Region‐specific drivers cause low organic carbon stocks and sequestration rates in the saltmarsh soils of southern <scp>Scandinavia</scp>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Saltmarshes are known for their ability to act as effective sinks of organic carbon (OC) and their protection and restoration could potentially slow down the pace of global warming. However, regional estimates of saltmarsh OC storage are often missing, including for the Nordic region. To address this knowledge gap, we assessed OC storage and accumulation rates in 17 saltmarshes distributed along the Danish coasts and investigated the main drivers of soil OC storage. Danish saltmarshes store a median of 10 kg OC m −2 (interquartile range, IQR: 13.5–7.6) in the top meter and sequester 31.5 g OC m −2 yr −1 (IQR: 41.6–15.7). In a global context, these values are comparatively low. Soils with abundant clay (> 20%), older and stable saltmarshes in mesohaline settings, and with low proportion of algal organic material showed higher OC densities, stocks, and accumulation rates. Grazing led to significantly higher OC stocks than neighboring ungrazed locations, likely due to trampling modifying soil abiotic conditions (higher erosion‐resistance and higher clay content) that slow carbon decay. Scaling up, Danish saltmarsh soils, comprising about 1% of the country's area, have the potential to yearly capture up to 0.1% of Denmark's annual consumption‐based CO 2 emissions. Our research expands the baseline data needed to advance blue carbon research and management in the Nordic region while highlighting the need for a more comprehensive approach to saltmarsh management that considers the full range of services of these ecosystems and does not only focus on climate benefits.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".