MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986164949 · doi:10.1029/2000jd000253

Water balance of the Indus River Basin and moisture source in the Karakoram and western Himalayas: Implications from hydrogen and oxygen isotopes in river water

2002· article· en· W1986164949 on OpenAlexaff
Ajaz Karim, Ján Veizer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicGroundwater and Isotope Geochemistry
Canadian institutionsCarleton UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
FundersInternational Atomic Energy Agency
KeywordsHydrology (agriculture)EvapotranspirationGroundwater rechargeMeteoric waterWater balanceDrainage basinGroundwaterPrecipitationSurface waterEnvironmental scienceIndusGeologyStructural basinSoil waterAquiferGeomorphologySoil scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stable isotope measurements of hydrogen and oxygen for surface waters from the Indus River Basin (IRB), together with historical records for river discharge, annual precipitation, and groundwater levels, are used to assess water balance for the basin. The Indus River presently drains 53 km 3 yr −1 or roughly one‐eighth of the 398‐km 3 water that annually falls on the basin in the form of rain and snow, with the remainder returned to the atmosphere by evapotranspiration. Monthly samples for the Indus River close to its mouth, for the water year March 1994 to February 1995, show a tight correlation in δD and δ 18 O space. The slope of the linear regression is 7.5, which is not significantly different from the slopes of the Local Meteoric Water Lines (LMWL; 7.3 and 7.1). This observation argues against significant loss of water by direct evaporation from river surfaces or from soils in hydrologic continuum with surface waters. An upper limit for evaporation from poorly drained soils is calculated to be ∼10 km 3 yr −1 or only 2.5% of the annual precipitation flux. Groundwater storage in the entire Canal Command Area received a maximum of 23 km 3 yr −1 or 5.8% of the annual precipitation during the early stages of irrigation, but modern recharge is probably balanced by discharge to rivers and well exploitation. Transpiration by natural vegetation and crops annually returns 83% of the precipitation flux and constitutes the largest pathway for the loss of water from the basin. Deuterium excess ( d ‐excess) in the IRB ranges between 4‰ and 28‰, with values for 95% of the sample population exceeding 10‰. The Indus main channel close to its mouth varies in d ‐excess between 12‰ and 20‰ during low and high water stands, respectively, with a discharge weighted average of 18‰. These values are distinctly higher than the long‐term average for the Indian monsoon (∼8‰) and reflect contributions from water vapor originating in the Mediterranean (22‰) or other inland seas. Using these end‐member compositions and the discharge weighted average d ‐excess, isotope balance calculations require that up to 72% of the Indus discharge close to its mouth must be derived from the Mediterranean end‐member and implies that bulk of the Indus discharge is the result of delayed runoff from the Karakoram and the Himalayas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.221 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations163
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Geophysical Research AtmospheresSame topicGroundwater and Isotope GeochemistryFrench-language works237,207