The influence of microtopography on soil carbon accumulation and nutrient release from a rewetted coastal peatland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Coastal peatlands have been frequently blocked from the sea and artificially drained for agriculture. With an increasing awareness of ecosystem functions, several of these coastal peatlands have been rewetted through dike removal, allowing seawater flooding. In this study, we investigated a recently rewetted peatland on the Baltic Sea coast to characterize the prevailing soils/sediments with respect to organic matter accumulation and the potential release of nutrients upon seawater flooding. Eighty disturbed soil samples were collected from two depths at different elevations (–0.90 to 0.97 m compared to sea level) and analyzed for soil organic matter (SOM) content and carbon:nitrogen (C:N) ratio. Additionally, nine undisturbed soil cores were collected from three distinct elevation groups and used in leaching experiments with alternating freshwater and Baltic Sea water. The results demonstrated a moderate to strong spatial dependence of surface elevation, SOM content, and C:N ratio. SOM content and C:N ratio were strongly negatively correlated with elevation, indicating that organic matter mineralization was restricted in low-lying areas. The results also showed that the soils at low elevations release more dissolved organic carbon (DOC) and ammonium (NH4+) than soils at high elevations. For soils at low elevations, higher DOC concentrations were observed when flushing with freshwater, whereas higher NH4+ concentrations were found when flushing with brackish water. Recorded NH4+ concentrations in organic-rich peat reached 14.82 ± 9.25 mg L–1, exceeding Baltic seawater (e.g., 0.03 mg L–1) by two orders of magnitude. A potential sea level rise may increase the export of NH4+ from low-lying and rewetted peat soils to the sea, impacting adjacent marine ecosystems. Overall, in coastal peatlands, geochemical processes (e.g., C and N cycling and release) are closely linked to microtopography and related patterns of organic matter content of the soil and sediments.(The original article has been published in Geoderma, Volume 438, 116637; DOI: 10.1016/j.geoderma.2023.116637)
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 | 0.000 | 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 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".