Factors influencing stream temperatures in small streams: substrate effects and a shading experiment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The temperature of stream water is an important control of many in-stream processes. To better understand the processes and consequences of solar energy inputs to streams, stream temperature dynamics were examined before, during, and after experimental shading of a 150-m reach of a second-order stream in the Oregon Cascade Range. Maximum water temperatures declined significantly in the shaded reach, but minimum and mean temperatures were not modified. Heat budget calculations before shading show the dominance of solar energy as an influence of stream temperature. The influence of substrate type on stream temperature was examined separately where the water flowed first over bedrock and then through alluvial substrates. Maximum temperatures in the upstream bedrock reach were up to 8.6 °C higher and 3.4 °C lower than downstream in the alluvial reach. Better understanding of factors that influence not only maximum but minimum temperatures as well as diurnal temperature variation will highlight types of reaches in which stream temperature would be most responsive to changes in shading. Many apparent discrepancies in stream temperature literature can be explained by considering variation in the relative importance of different stream temperature drivers within and among streams and over time.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".