MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408246513 · doi:10.1111/gcb.70079

The Importance of Ditches and Canals in Global Inland Water <scp>CO<sub>2</sub></scp> and <scp>N<sub>2</sub>O</scp> Budgets

2025· article· en· W4408246513 on OpenAlexaff
Teresa Silverthorn, Joachim Audet, Chris Evans, Judith van der Knaap, Sarian Kosten, José R. Paranaíba, Quinten Struik, Jackie R. Webb, Wenxin Wu, Zhifeng Yan, Mike Peacock

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Change Biology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNorges ForskningsrådResearch EnglandSvenska Forskningsrådet Formas
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceHydrology (agriculture)Environmental chemistryGeologyChemistryGeotechnical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Ditches and canals are omitted from global budgets of inland water emissions, despite research showing them to be emitters of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Here, we synthesize data across climate zones and land use types to show, for the first time, that global ditches emit notable amounts of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and nitrous oxide (N 2 O). Ditches had higher per‐area emissions of CO 2 and N 2 O than ponds, lakes, and reservoirs, likely due to high nutrient inputs. Preliminary upscaling showed that the inclusion of ditches would increase global inland water CO 2 emissions by 0.6%–1% and N 2 O emissions by 3%–9%. Trophic state and climate influenced N 2 O emissions, while CO 2 emissions had complex drivers difficult to disentangle at the global scale. This research highlights the importance of including ditches in global inland water GHG budgets and informs more accurate reporting of anthropogenic emissions in national inventories.

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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.216 · 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

Citations20
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Change BiologySame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207