TREE RING RECONSTRUCTIONS OF STREAMFLOW FOR THREE CANADIAN PRAIRIE RIVERS<sup>1</sup>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT: Information regarding long term hydrological variability is critical for the effective management of surface water resources. In the Canadian Prairie region, growing dependence on major river systems for irrigation and other consumptive uses has resulted in an increasing vulnerability to hydrological drought and growing interprovincial tension. This study presents the first dendrochronological records of streamflow for Canadian Prairie rivers. We present 1,113‐year, 522‐year, and 325‐year reconstructions of total water year (October to September) streamflow for the North Saskatchewan, South Saskatchewan, and Saskatchewan Rivers, respectively. The reconstructions indicate relatively high flows during the 20th Century and provide evidence of past prolonged droughts. Low flows during the 1840s correspond with aridity that extended over much of the western United States. Similarly, an exceptional period of prolonged low flow conditions, approximately 900 A.D. to 1300 A.D., is coincident with evidence of sustained drought across central and western North America. The 16th Century megadrought of the western United States and Mexico, however, does not appear to have had a major impact on the Canadian rivers. The dendrohydrological records illustrate the risks involved if future water policy and infrastructure development in the Canadian Prairies are based solely on records of streamflow variability over the historical record.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".