Quantifying Carbon Pools and Fluxes in Southern Ontario Temperate Swamps
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Swamps are treed wetlands, which account for the highest areal extent of wetland types in Southern Ontario due to the difficulties of conversion for development and agriculture. However, little is known about the environmental factors and processes that influence carbon (C) dynamics or the resulting C stocks and fluxes therein. We studied 12 swamps across Southern Ontario for 12 consecutive months to measure the exchange of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) and methane (CH 4 ) between soil and atmosphere and estimate current C stocks in soil and biomass. We found mean growing season soil respiration of CO 2 and CH 4 across the swamps ranged from 11 g m -2 d -1 to 49 g m -2 d -1 and -3 mg m -2 d -1 to 44 mg m -2 d -1 , respectively, with a water table threshold at about 20 cm where fluxes changed substantially. Biomass stored 7.92–37.0 kg m -2 of C across the sites, and soil stored 11.6–35.5 kg m -2 . Over the study year, the swamps functioned as C sinks and followed similar patterns of relationships to environmental conditions as bogs and fens, with little difference between hydrogeomorphic settings or canopy types.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".