Potential impacts of climate change on water availability for crops in the Okanagan Basin, British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Crop water demand in the Okanagan Basin was determined for 1961 to 1990, 2010 to 2039, 2040 to 2069, and 2070 to 2099. Daily station temperature data were spatially interpolated to a 1 × 1 km grid and adjusted for elevation. Daily precipitation data were estimated across four climatic regions. Output from three global climate models (GCM), CGCM2, CSIROMk2 and HadCM3 was used to create future daily climate. Daily potential evapo-transpiration (grass reference) was estimated from an empirical relationship between Bellani- plate atmometer readings, temperature and extra-terrestrial solar radiation, and then modified by crop coefficients for all crops except pasture. Depending on GCM, projected water demand increased by 12–20% (2010 to 2039), 24–38% (2040 to 2069) and 40–61% (2070 to 2099). Possible elevated CO 2 effects on stomatal conductance, which may reduce water demand, were not accounted for. Comparisons with modeled Okanagan Lake inflows indicated that, on average, high water demand and low supply scenarios coincided. In one sub-basin, supply and demand thresholds were exceeded 1 yr in 6 (HadCM3) in the 2050s and at least 1 yr in 4 for all GCMs by the 2080s, and existing water supply infrastructure may be inadequate. Crop growing seasons were defined empirically from growing degree days or threshold temperatures. The growing season lengthened up to 30–35% leading to higher demand in fall and shortages due to low stream flows. Key words: Evapotranspiration, growing degree days, growing season, GIS, PRISM
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".