Sources of Ground Water Salinity on Islands Using <sup>18</sup> O, <sup>2</sup> H, and <sup>34</sup> S
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stable isotopes of 18O and 2H in water, and 34S and 18O in dissolved SO4, are used to verify the interpretation of the chemical evolution and proposed sources of salinity for two islands that have undergone postglacial rebound. Results for delta18O and delta34S in dissolved SO4 on the Gulf Islands, southwest British Columbia, Canada, suggest a three-component mixing between (1) atmospheric SO4 derived largely from recharge of meteoric origin, (2) modern marine SO4 associated with either modern-day salt water intrusion or Pleistocene age sea water, and (3) terrestrial SO4. The age of the marine SO4 is uncertain based on the geochemistry and SO4 isotopes alone. Two options for mixing of saline ground waters are proposed--either between current-day marine SO4 and atmospheric SO4, or between older (Pleistocene age) marine SO4 and atmospheric SO4, delta18O and delta2H compositions are relatively consistent between both islands, with a few samples showing evidence of mixing with water that is a hybrid mixture of Fraser River water and ocean water. The isotopic composition of this hybrid water is approximately delta18O = 10 per thousand. delta18O and delta2H values for many saline ground waters plot close to the global meteoric water line, which is distinctly different from the local meteoric water line. This suggests a meteoric origin for ground waters that is different from the current isotopic composition of meteoric waters. It is proposed these waters may be late Pleistocene in age and were recharged when the island was submerged below sea level and prior to rebound at the end of the last glaciation.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".