Patterns and drivers of organic matter decomposition in peatland open-water pools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. Peatland pools are unvegetated, inundated depressions that cover up to 30 % of the surface of many temperate and boreal peatlands and that are net carbon (C) sources within C-accumulating ecosystems. The emission of carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane (CH4) from peatland pools comes from the degradation of organic matter (OM) that comprises the surrounding matrix. It is, however, not clear how decomposition rates in pools, which define their function and distinguish them from other aquatic ecosystems, vary spatially and what mechanisms drive these variations. We first quantified rates of OM decomposition from fresh litter at different depths in six pools of distinct morphological characteristics in a temperate ombrotrophic peatland using litterbags of Sphagnum capillifolium and Typha latifolia over a 27-month period. Rates of decomposition were faster for T. latifolia than S. capillifolium and, overall, faster at the pool surface and decreased with increasing depth. We then measured potential CO2 and CH4 production from the sediments of the same six pools by performing 35 d laboratory incubations. Pool sediment chemistry was variable among pools and influenced the production of CH4 and CO2 from sediments, with decreasing CO2 production with increasing OM humification and decreasing CH4 production with increasing nitrogen-to-phosphorus ratio. Both CH4 production and CO2 production from pool sediments were higher in the 1 m deep pools but similar in the shallow < 1 and the > 1.5 m deep pools. When combining both experiments, our results indicate that OM decomposition in peatland pools is highly variable and mostly related to the environmental conditions in which it occurs as a function of general pool depth rather than to OM chemistry. Overall, we show that OM degradation and C emissions in peatland open-water pools may increase over time in warmer and drier climate conditions.
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) | 0.002 | 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".