Surface water chemistry of burned and undisturbed watersheds on the Boreal Plain: an ecoregion approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The water chemistry of the euphotic zone in 12 lakes within burned and reference watersheds on Alberta's Boreal Plain was surveyed two years post-fire. Five burned and four reference lakes were located in the Boreal Foothills (mean elevation = 1048 m) and three reference lakes were situated at lower elevations in the Boreal Mixedwood ecoregion (748 m). Mean dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentration in lake water from burned watersheds was 1.4-fold higher than in lake water from reference Foothills watersheds, whereas lake colour increased with the area of catchment burned divided by lake volume (r = 0.98). Reference Mixedwood lakes had higher mean total phosphorus (TP, 1.8-fold) and chlorophyll a (chl a; 4.4-fold) concentrations than reference Foothills lakes. Ten additional lakes from a previous study in boreal Alberta were used to further compare water chemistry between ecoregions. Boreal Mixedwood lakes (n = 13) had higher TP (2.3-fold), chl a (3-fold), and Ca 2+ + Mg 2+ (3.3-fold) concentrations than Boreal Foothills lakes (n = 9). Our data suggest an influence of forest fire on lake chemistry in the Boreal Foothills, and demonstrate the need for an ecoregion approach to detect the impacts of watershed disturbance on the Boreal Plain. Key words: watershed disturbance, forest fire, lake nutrients, lake elevation, phosphorus, chlorophyll a, anions, cations, dissolved organic carbon.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".