MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4392595610 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu24-4204

Process-based modelling of long-term carbon dynamics in a temperate swamp peatland

2024· preprint· en· W4392595610 on OpenAlexaffabout
Oluwabamise Lanre Afolabi, Hongxing He, Maria Strack

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwampPeatTerm (time)Temperate climateEnvironmental scienceEcologyForest dynamicsGeographyBiologyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Temperate swamps hold substantial carbon (C) in their standing biomass and can potentially accumulate peat. In Southern Ontario, Canada, swamp peats are estimated to store ~1.1 Pg C, with this C accumulation supported by distinct hydroclimatic conditions. Previous studies on swamps C fluxes are mostly based on short-term (30 years) interactions and feedbacks that exist between temperate swamp C flux and biophysical conditions. In this study, we adopted a process-based model (CoupModel, www.coupmodel.com) to simulate daily plant processes, energy, water, and C fluxes in one of the most well-preserved swamps in Southern Ontario, Beverly Swamp, over a 40-year period (1983-2023). CoupModel reproduced the measured C flux and controlling variables with (coefficient of determination, R2) values of 0.75, 0.94 & 0.6 for soil respiration, surface soil temperature (0-5 cm) and water table depth, respectively. Analysis of the interrelationships (R2 values) between the simulated carbon flux and biophysical conditions showed that 88%, 51%, 31%, 68% of soil respiration rates were explained by soil surface temperature, soil volumetric moisture contents (0-30 cm), water table depth and gross primary productivity, respectively. Our model simulation showed the swamp’s C uptake capacity, as net ecosystem exchange, dwindled over the simulated period but it was a net C sink in most years. This decreasing trend can be attributed to warmer and drier conditions in the region, which may be exacerbated with future climate change predictions. Overall, the study shows that processed-based models (CoupModel) are effective tools for improving our understanding of long-term C dynamics of temperate forested wetlands and the interactions that exist between C flux components and abiotic conditions. This has implications for informed decision-making on the management of temperate swamp ecosystems and the C stored within them.

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.381
Threshold uncertainty score0.757

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.235 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology→French-language works237,207→