MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408484652 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu25-20039

Restoring metal contaminated peatlands in Sudbury, Ontario

2025· preprint· en· W4408484652 on OpenAlexaffabout
Ellie M. Goud, Colin P. R. McCarter, Pete Whittington, Peter Beckett, Florin Pendea, John M. Gunn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology
Canadian institutionsLaurentian UniversityLakehead UniversityNipissing UniversityBrandon UniversitySaint Mary's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeatContaminationEnvironmental scienceMining engineeringEnvironmental chemistryGeologyEarth scienceArchaeologyGeographyChemistryEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Industrial contamination has profoundly impacted peatland ecosystems, degrading their biodiversity and essential functions such as carbon sequestration. The Sudbury region in Ontario, Canada is one of the world's largest metal mining centres and historically the largest global point source of sulfur and metal pollution and serves as a critical case study for understanding and addressing these impacts. Peatlands closest to pollution sources have suffered extensive degradation, with keystone vegetation, including Sphagnum mosses, locally extinct and peat layers showing significant carbon losses. Developing innovative restoration techniques is crucial before undertaking regional-scale restoration of metal-impacted peatlands, ensuring chemical stressors are overcome effectively while minimizing sequestered metal release. In collaboration with regional stakeholders and academic institutions, our interdisciplinary team is pioneering innovative restoration techniques to reinstate peatland functionality in this toxic metal and metalloid-polluted landscape. Building on established practices, such as the moss-layer transfer technique, our modified approaches incorporate surface tilling, mulching, fertilization, and the reintroduction of donor peatland material. These interventions aim to overcome chemical stressors like persistent high concentrations of water-extractable metals (e.g., copper and nickel), which inhibit Sphagnum recovery. A restoration field trial began in fall 2023 with surface mulching, and in spring 2024 we applied restoration treatments of mulch, fertilizer, and planting. Here, we present results from the first growing season for peat chemistry, hydrology, greenhouse gas fluxes, and vegetation.

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)0.000
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.166

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicPeatlands and Wetlands Ecology→French-language works237,207→