Lateral flow thresholds for aspen forested hillslopes on the Western Boreal Plain, Alberta, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To predict the long‐term sustainability of water resources on the Boreal Plain region of northern Alberta, it is critical to understand when hillslopes generate runoff and connect with surface waters. The sub‐humid climate (P ≤ ET) and deep glacial sediments of this region result in large available soil storage capacity relative to moisture surpluses or deficits, leading to threshold‐dependent rainfall‐runoff relationships. Rainfall simulation experiments were conducted using large magnitude and high intensity applications to examine the thresholds in precipitation and soil moisture that are necessary to generate lateral flow from hillslope runoff plots representative of Luvisolic soils and an aspen canopy. Two adjacent plots (areas of 2·95 and 3·4 m2) of contrasting antecedent moisture conditions were examined; one had tree root uptake excluded for two months to increase soil moisture content, while the second plot allowed tree uptake over the growing season resulting in drier soils. Vertical flow as drainage and soil moisture storage dominated the water balances of both plots. Greater lateral flow occurred from the plot with higher antecedent moisture content. Results indicate that a minimum of 15–20 mm of rainfall is required to generate lateral flow, and only after the soils have been wetted to a depth of 0·75 m (C‐horizon). The depth and intensity of rainfall events that generated runoff > 1 mm have return periods of 25 years or greater and, when combined with the need for wet antecendent conditions, indicate that lateral flow generation on these hillslopes will occur infrequently. Copyright © 2008 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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".