Overwinter Changes in Wind Erodibility of Clay Loam Soils in Southern Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Soil dry aggregate size distribution (DASD) and surface roughness are important factors affecting wind erodibility. This study monitored overwinter changes in DASD and surface roughness and identified relationships with climatic variables in the chinook‐dominated region of southern Alberta. A different site was monitored in each of three winters (18 Sept. 1992 to 12 May 1993; 26 Oct. 1993 to 29 Apr. 1994; 30 Aug. 1994 to 24 May 1995) on Dark Brown Chernozemic clay loams (fine‐loamy, mixed, Typic Haploborolls). The DASD was expressed as geometric mean diameter (GMD) and wind erodible fraction (EF). The GMD ranged from 1.88 to 0.08 mm in 1992‐1993, from 9.05 to 1.17 mm in 1993‐1994, and from 4.71 to 0.80 mm in 1994‐1995. The EF ranged from 38.9 to 74.0% in 1992‐1993, from 12.6 to 43.7% in 1993‐1994, and 31.3 to 55.0% in 1994‐1995. Surface roughness was measured parallel ( C par ) to tillage direction on two of the sites. Using the chain method, C par ranged from 15.1 to 3.7% in 1993‐1994 and from 14.4 to 3.3% in 1994‐1995. Regression analysis with time revealed significant exponential decay for GMD ( R 2 = 0.57 in 1992‐1993, 0.97 in 1993‐1994, and 0.78 in 1994‐1995) and C par ( R 2 = 0.98 in 1993‐1994, 0.91 in 1994‐1995) and a positive linear fit for EF ( R 2 = 0.57 in 1992‐1993, 0.91 in 1993‐1994, and 0.62 in 1994‐1995). Three overwinter periods, differentiated by the timing and form of precipitation and designated as “fall rain/snow”, “winter snow”, and “spring snow/rain”, were used to assess the changes in EF using cumulative freeze–thaw cycles, precipitation, and snow cover variables. Results indicated that precipitation, which directly influences soil water content, is necessary for freeze–thaw cycles to be effective in disrupting soil aggregates. Snowmelt and spring rainfall appear capable of reducing wind erodibility on these clay loam soils by promoting soil crusting. Our study showed that overwinter soil properties affecting wind erodibility are highly transitory and that the timing and form of precipitation played a major role in determining wind erosion risk in southern Alberta.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".