Modelling climate change impacts on the hydrology of an agricultural watershed in southern Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Spring flooding and water availability during the summer are two major concerns in southern Québec. Climate change is expected to further exacerbate shortages of fresh water resources in Québec. Therefore, the impacts of climate change on the hydrology of the Pike River watershed were projected for the 2041–2070 time horizon using a version of the Soil and Water Assessment Tool (SWATqc) adapted to Québec’s agroclimatic conditions. SWATqc was driven by inputs from four climate projections created with the fourth-generation Canadian Regional Climate Model (CRCM4) and the Arpège regional climate model. CRCM4 was driven at the border of its domain by three members of the Canadian Coupled Global Climate Model (CGCM3). The Arpège model, which has a variable grid, is not driven by another model. The gas emissions scenario used to drive climate models was scenario A2. Regional climate data sets were bias-corrected with the delta method prior to being used to drive SWATqc. Projected changes in precipitation and temperatures were analysed for their effects on evapotranspiration, surface and subsurface runoff, and streamflow. Mean annual streamflow was projected to increase between 9 and 19%. All future simulations projected significant increases or decreases in evapotranspiration, surface and subsurface runoff, and streamflow at the monthly time scale. Winter streamflow, for example, increased by 2- to 3-fold compared with the historical values. In addition, future spring floods started earlier and peaked in March instead of April. The four simulations were named ADC, ACU, AFA/AFD, and ARP. All but the ACU simulation projected a decrease in peak flow, while the ADC, AFD and ARP simulations suggested an increase. Although the majority of the simulations pointed to decreases in summer streamflows, the changes were not all significantly different from historical values. Results from this study not only show that climate change has a strong potential to exacerbate seasonal water availability and flooding issues in the watershed, but also provide conservative numbers that could be used in developing improved watershed management plans adapted to future climate change impacts.
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 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".