Growing season carbon dioxide exchange of two contrasting peatland ecosystems
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The CO2 flux of two peatlands in northern Alberta was examined during the 2004 growing season using eddy covariance measurements of net ecosystem exchange (NEE), chamber measurements of total ecosystem respiration, and empirical models driven by meteorological inputs.The two ecosystems, a poor fen and an extreme-rich fen, differed significantly in plant species composition, leaf area index, aboveground biomass and surface water chemistry.The mean diurnal pattern of NEE at the peak of the season was similar between the sites, however, the extreme-rich fen had a higher photo synthetic and respiratory capacity than the poor fen.Over the 6 month study, the poor fen was shown to accumulate between 2 to 3 times more carbon than the extreme-rich fen despite having a lower photosynthetic capacity.The evergreen nature of the poor fen site allowed for a longer season of net CO2 uptake than the deciduous species that dominated the extreme-rich fen.iii v 4. Discussion 77 4.1 Seasonal trends in net ecosystem exchange 77 4.2 Peak growing season net ecosystem exchange 79 4.3 Chamber respiration measurements 82 4.4 Growing season carbon budget calculations 8 7 4.5 Estimation of uncertainty in net ecosystem exchange measurements 92 4.6 Implications offindings and potential future research 95 5. Conclusions 102
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".