MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401620542 · doi:10.1002/ecy.4398

Peat profile database from peatlands in Canada

2024· article· en· W4401620542 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ilka E. Bauer, Marissa A. Davies, Kelly Ann Bona, Oleksandra Hararuk, Cindy Shaw, Dan K. Thompson, Werner A. Kurz, Kara L. Webster, Michelle Garneau, Jim McLaughlin, Maara Packalen, Emily Prystupa, Nicole K. Sanderson, C. Tarnocai

Bibliographic record

VenueEcology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food CanadaGovernment of New BrunswickMinistry of Natural Resources and ForestryOntario Forest Research InstituteUniversité du Québec à MontréalCanadian Forest ServiceEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
FundersGovernment of Canada
KeywordsPeatEnvironmental scienceBulk densityCarbon fibersHydrology (agriculture)Table (database)BogWater tableOmbrotrophicGreenhouse gasLitterHectareCarbon cycleSoil sciencePhysical geographyEcosystemEcologyGeologyDatabaseGeographySoil waterGroundwaterMathematicsArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Peatlands cover approximately 12% of the Canadian landscape and play an important role in the carbon cycle through their centennial- to millennial-scale storage of carbon under waterlogged and anoxic conditions. In recognizing the potential of these ecosystems as natural climate solutions and therefore the need to include them in national greenhouse gas inventories, the Canadian Model for Peatlands module (CaMP v. 2.0) was developed by the Canadian Forest Service. Model parameterization included compiling peat profiles across Canada to calibrate peat decomposition rates from different peatland types, to define typical bulk density profiles, and to describe the hydrological (i.e., water table) response of peatlands to climatic changes. A total of 1217 sites were included in the dataset from published and unpublished sources. The CORESITES table contains site location and summary data for each profile, as well as an estimate of total carbon mass per unit area (in megagrams of C per hectare). Total carbon mass per unit area at each location was calculated using bulk density and carbon content through each profile. The PROFILES table contains data for depth (in centimeters), bulk density (in grams per cubic meter), ash and carbon content (in percentage), and material descriptions for contiguous samples through each peat profile. Data gaps for bulk density and C content were filled using interpolation, regression trees, and assigned values based on material description and/or soil classification to allow for the estimation of total carbon mass per unit area. A subset of the sites (N = 374) also have pH and pore water trace-elemental geochemistry data and are found in the WATER table. The REFERENCES table contains the full citation of each source of the data and is linked to each core location through the SOURCEDATA table. The LOOKUP table defines codes in the database that required more space that what was sufficient in the metadata tables. The data can be accessed on Open Government Canada and will be useful for future work on carbon stock mapping and ecosystem modeling. All metadata and data are provided © Her Majesty the Queen in Right of Canada, 2023 and information contained in this publication may be reproduced for personal or public noncommercial purposes with attribution, whereas commercial reproduction and distribution are prohibited except with written permission from NRCan; complete details are noted in the Supporting Information file Metadata S1 (see Class III.B.3: Copyright restrictions).

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.013
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.007

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcologySame topicPeatlands and Wetlands EcologyFrench-language works237,207