Operation and Evaluation of Hypolimnetic Withdrawal in a Shallow Eutrophic Lake
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chain Lake is a small (46 ha), shallow (zmean = 6 m, zmax = 9 m) eutrophic lake in the interior of British Columbia, Canada. It suffers from severe blue-green algae blooms fed by internally loaded phosphorus. A hypolimnetic withdrawal system began operation in 1994, and is operated annually during the ice free period of the year. It is gravity driven (no mechanical pumps) and can operate at rates up to 80 L · s−1. A monitoring program implemented as part of the withdrawal installation evaluated total phosphorus export, lake water quality effects, and downstream environmental impacts. The withdrawal does not accelerate hydraulic flushing of the lake (residence time 0.5–3 years) but preferentially drains the water column below 5 m every 100 days and drains the deepest region of the lake (6–9 m) approximately every two weeks. Total phosphorus export in the first year of operation was 30 kg, and optimization of the operation strategy should increase export to 60 kg per year, resulting in a net export of total phosphorus from the lake. Long term monitoring of water quality has been performed by resident volunteers for nine years (1994 – 2002) using Secchi measurements. Only a few data are available prior to the withdrawal operation. A non-parametric trend test found statistically significant increases of the monthly median Secchi depth for June (p<0.05) and August (p<0.10). Optimization of the withdrawal operation to maximize phosphorus export can be done by earlier start-up after ice off and increasing flow rates during the most anoxic periods. Downstream concerns with respect to the withdrawal operation include: dissolved oxygen depletion observed at the withdrawal site and up to 500 m downstream; nutrient enrichment with elevated concentrations of phosphorus observed in the withdrawn water; and elevated levels of ammonia, iron, and manganese observed in the withdrawn water in the first year of monitoring. The effects of anoxic water discharge were partially mitigated by a fountain aerator at the discharge point which increased the dissolved oxygen in the withdrawal stream by up to 2.0 mg · L−1.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".