Late Prehistoric Human Impact on Bass Pond, Port au Choix
Bibliographic record
Abstract
CALIBRATED RADIOCARBON DATES place the Groswater and Dorset Palaeoeskimo occupations of Port au Choix at 2950-1820 cal BP 1 and 1990-1180 cal BP, respectively. Faunal studies (Kennett 1990; Murray 1992; Hodgetts et al. 2003) have demonstrated that populations of both cultures engaged in harp seal hunting during the late winter and early spring, and Hodgetts (this volume) demonstrates that Dorset also exploited harp seal during the early winter. Excavation of Groswater and Dorset sites at Port au Choix (Renouf 1993, 1994, 1999) reveals that Dorset occupation was more intensive than Groswater, and was more narrowly focused on the harp seal. In this paper we demonstrate that at 2200-1800 cal BP there were marked changes in the local environment observable in the fossil pollen and spores, algal remains and charcoal in pond sediments from Bass Pond, adjacent to Palaeoeskimo sites in Port au Choix (Figure 1). We compare these to data from Stove Pond, which represents a prehistoric baseline record from an interior, non-inhabited location. The changes observable in the Bass Pond environmental record are coincident with nearby Palaeoeskimo occupations, and we argue that Groswater and Dorset activities had clear and recognizable impacts on their local environment through (i) alteration of the natural vegetation by wood-cutting and burning; (ii) disturbance and erosion of soil; (iii) disturbance and trampling of wetlands; and (iv) temporary increases in lake nutrients (eutrophication) and salinity.
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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".