Recovery from acidification in Nova Scotia: temporal trends and critical loads for 20 headwater lakes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chemical response of 20 headwater lakes in Nova Scotia to reduced acid deposition was investigated using trend analysis, and the need for further reductions was assessed using two steady-state, critical load models. Significant decreases were observed in the concentration of nonmarine sulphate (SO42) and hydrogen (H+) at four wet deposition monitoring stations across Atlantic Canada since 1984. Dominant trends in surface water were decreasing SO42concentrations, with little improvement in alkalinity and H+. Based on the Steady State Water Chemistry (SSWC) and First-order Acidity Balance (FAB) models, and using a critical chemical limit for acid-neutralizing capacity of 20 µmolc·L1, critical load is exceeded at 9 and 13 of the 20 study lakes, respectively. Application of the SSWC model suggests that sulphur (S) deposition must be reduced by 37.3 mmolc·m2·year1from 1997 levels to prevent critical load exceedance at 95% of the study lakes. Using the FAB model, the minimum reductions in nitrogen and S deposition necessary to protect 95% of the study lakes are 32.7 and 42.1 mmolc·m2·year1, respectively. Additional reductions beyond those proposed for 2030 are required to minimize critical load exceedance and promote recovery in alkalinity and pH of surface waters at the study catchments.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".