Historical variability and feedbacks among land cover, stream power, and channel geometry along the lower Canadian River floodplain in Oklahoma
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT In 1820, the lower Canadian River meandered through a densely forested floodplain. By 1898, most of the floodplain had been cleared for agriculture and changes in channel geometry and specific stream power followed, particularly channel widening and straightening with a lower potential specific stream power. In 1964, a large upstream hydropower dam was constructed, which changed the flow regime in the lower Canadian River and consequently the channel geometry. Without destructive overbank floods, the channel narrowed rapidly and considerably due to encroachment by floodplain vegetation. The lower Canadian River, which was once a highly dynamic floodplain‐river system, has now been transformed into a relatively static river channel. These changes over the past 200 years have not been linear or independent. In this article, we use a variety of data sources to assess these historical changes along the lower Canadian River floodplain and identify feedbacks among floodplain cultivation, dam construction, specific stream power, and channel width, slope, and sinuosity. Finally, we combine the results of our study with others in the region to present a biogeomorphic response model for large Great Plains rivers that characterizes channel width changes in response to climate variability and anthropogenic disturbances. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".