MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395684005 · doi:10.1029/2023jg007597

Temperature, Water Depth, and Flow Velocity Are Important Drivers of Methane Ebullition in a Temperate Lowland Stream

2024· article· en· W4395684005 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Bednařík, Pascal Bodmer, Eva Dařenová, Lukáš Kokrda, Marian Pavelka

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Biogeosciences · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTemperate climateMethaneEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Flow (mathematics)Water flowSTREAMSGeologySoil scienceEcologyMechanicsGeotechnical engineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Streams and rivers are a well‐recognized source of methane (CH4), with high spatiotemporal variability in fluxes. However, CH4 release in form of bubbles (ebullition) is rarely included in current global CH4 emission estimates from lotic ecosystems, due to the lack of reliable models to upscale ebullition. Our study aimed to determine the importance of individual emission pathways (diffusion and ebullition) for total CH4 emissions from a lowland stream with low sediment heterogeneity and explore the relations of ebullition to environmental variables to build a stream ebullition model for this simplified system. We measured CH4 and carbon dioxide (CO2) diffusive emissions and ebullition from a temperate lowland stream in Czech Republic (Central Europe) during the ice‐free season 2021. The studied stream was a significant source of CH4 (mean 260 ± 107 mg CH4 m−2 day−1), with ebullition as a prevailing pathway of CH4 emission (mean 74 ± 7%, range 55%–85%) throughout the whole monitored period. CH4 ebullition showed a high spatiotemporal heterogeneity, with sediment temperature and water depth as the strongest predictors, followed by the interaction between flow velocity and sediment temperature. Our model explained 81% of total variance of CH4 ebullition and suggests that it is possible to model ebullitive fluxes in lowland streams with homogeneous sediments. Since CH4 was an important part of the total CO2‐equivalent emissions from the examined stream, accounting for mean (±SD) 35 ± 7.4%, and ebullition the majority of the CH4 emission, the ability to adequately model ebullition is pertinent for lowland streams.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.264 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research BiogeosciencesSame topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas DynamicsFrench-language works237,207