MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109979635 · doi:10.1080/02626660209492983

Is ecohydrology one idea or many?

2002· article· en· W2109979635 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Sciences Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicIntegrated Water Resources Management
Canadian institutionsHydro One (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcohydrologyEnvironmental scienceBiologyEcologyEcosystem

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Examples cited by Kundzewicz (2002) to provoke discussion of ecohydrology reveal divergent notions of the fundamental nature of the concept. At issue is the answer to this question—does the term “ecohydrology” refer to a single idea or does it encompass many different ideas? Here, I argue that ecohydrology encompasses diverse ideas at the interface between hydrology and ecosystem science. Zalewski’s (2000) definition captures the competing views of ecohydrology, even as it attempts to reconcile them; “Ecohydrology, the study of the functional interrelationships between hydrology and biota at the catchment scale, is a new approach to achieving sustainable management of water.” First, ecohydrology is introduced as an area of study directed toward understanding the interdependence of hydrological and ecological processes. Next, ecohydrology provides a single, overarching paradigm for water management based on a holistic vision of water’s role in the environment. Can ecohydrology be both of these things? Traditional water management depends on information derived from hydrological science. A holistic approach to water management similarly depends on integrated study of hydrological and ecological processes (Fig. 1). However, science alone does not determine management. Other factors, besides scientific knowledge, combine to determine the overall approach to water management. Therefore, ecohydrology is either an overarching paradigm for water management, or it is the study of the interaction of hydrological and ecological processes. It cannot be both. I suggest that ecohydrology is the sub-discipline shared by the ecological and hydrological sciences that is concerned with the effects of hydrological processes on the distribution, structure, and function of ecosystems, and on the effects of biotic processes on elements of the water cycle (Nuttle, 2002). This combines RodriguezIturbe’s (2000) view of ecohydrology as “the science which seeks to describe the hydrological mechanisms that underlie ecologic pattern and processes” with his subsequent observation that “the connection between the role of plants in the water balance is central to ecohydrology” (Rodriguez-Iturbe et al., 2001). This definition focuses on the role of hydrological processes in ecosystems, consistent with Rodriguez-Iturbe’s reference to “ecologic pattern and processes.” As Kundzewicz (2002) observes, the etymology of “ecohydrology” links hydrology with the relatively broad field of ecology. However, the study of hydrological processes makes little or no contribution in some areas of ecology, e.g. population ecology.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.353
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1710.007

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.195 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it