Winter streamflow variability, Yukon Territory, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Knowledge of winter streamflow regimes is required in northern catchments to evaluate water supply and to assess the vulnerability of aquatic habitat. The objective of this study was to explore the nature and causes of winter streamflow variability in northern rivers through examination of a limited number of case studies involving intensive field measurements, as well as a synoptic analysis of winter streamflow measurements archived by Water Survey of Canada for rivers in Yukon Territory, Canada. Evidence was found for an abrupt decrease in discharge at freeze‐up in one of the case studies and for 10 of the 25 stations in the synoptic analysis that had measurements within 30 days of freeze‐up (an additional 12 stations had no measurements within 30 days of freeze‐up). However, given the paucity of measurements in the early winter, the magnitude, duration and frequency of these events cannot be specified. The case studies indicate that, even where a coherent depression does not occur, discharge can fluctuate around a smooth recession trend for about the first 30 days after the onset of ice effects, probably as a result of transient storage and release of water behind ice jams. A storage‐depletion model that represents streamflow as outflow from two parallel linear reservoirs provided a reasonable fit to most of the observed measurements (excluding those in the first 30 days following freeze‐up), with model fit deteriorating with increasing latitude and decreasing catchment size. The effect of latitude could relate to abstraction of flow by ice production, which would cause deviations from a storage‐depletion trend. Northern catchments also tended to have steeper late‐winter recessions, which could reflect a lack of extensive, deep aquifers to maintain late‐winter discharge. The tendency to poorer model fit in smaller catchments could reflect a problem with data reliability, since it is more difficult to find good winter gauging sections in smaller streams. Some evidence for temperature‐related discharge fluctuations was found in both the case studies and synoptic analyses. However, the magnitude of these effects appears to be about ±10 to 15%, at most, and not to be consistent between winters. Further advances in understanding winter streamflow variability will require frequent measurements on a range of streams over a number of winters. Copyright © 2002 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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.017 | 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".