Contribution of groundwater to the outflow from ungauged glacierized catchments: a multi‐site study in the tropical Cordillera Blanca, Peru
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The rapid retreat of the glaciers of the Cordillera Blanca is having a noticeable impact on the downstream hydrology. Although groundwater is a critical hydrologic component that sustains stream flows during the dry season, its characteristics and its contribution to downstream hydrology remain poorly understood. In this study, we analyse the hydrochemical and isotopic properties of potential hydrologic sources mixing in surface streams to characterize the proglacial hydrology in four glacially fed watersheds within the Cordillera Blanca, Peru. Water samples from streams, glacial melt and groundwater were collected in 2008 and 2009 and analysed for major ions and stable isotopes (δ18O and δ2H). Multivariate analysis of variance was used first to identify the hydrochemical and isotopic characteristics (tracers) of the water samples that depend primarily on the water source. Then several analyses, including hierarchical cluster analysis and mixing diagrams, were performed using these source‐dependent tracers, enabling a qualitative description of the key hydrological mechanisms that characterize the study watersheds. Finally, we applied a multi‐component spatial mixing model, the hydrochemical basin characterization method, to quantify the contributions of different water sources to the outflow from the four watersheds. The hydrochemical basin characterization method results show that groundwater is a major component of the discharge during the dry season and that the groundwater contribution to outflow is greater than 24% in all of the valleys. The results are used to develop a conceptual proglacial hydrological model of the Cordillera Blanca valleys. Talus and avalanche cones are identified as key components of the hydrology of the valleys. The talus deposits collect precipitation and runoff from higher elevations (approximately 400 m above the valley floor) and have a residence time that is long enough to actively release substantial volumes of water throughout the dry season. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".