A Black Hills‐Madison Aquifer Origin for Dakota Aquifer Groundwater in Northeastern Nebraska
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies of the Dakota Aquifer in South Dakota attributed elevated groundwater sulfate concentrations to Madison Aquifer recharge in the Black Hills with subsequent chemical evolution prior to upward migration into the Dakota Aquifer. This study examines the plausibility of a Madison Aquifer origin for groundwater in northeastern Nebraska. Dakota Aquifer water samples were collected for major ion chemistry and isotopic analysis ((18)O, (2)H, (3)H, (14)C, (13)C, (34)S, (18)O-SO(4), (87)Sr, (37)Cl). Results show that groundwater beneath the eastern, unconfined portion of the study area is distinctly different from groundwater sampled beneath the western, confined portion. In the east, groundwater is calcium-bicarbonate type, with delta(18)O values (-9.6 per thousand to -12.4 per thousand) similar to local, modern precipitation (-7.4 per thousand to -10 per thousand), and tritium values reflecting modern recharge. In the west, groundwater is calcium-sulfate type, having depleted delta(18)O values (-16 per thousand to -18 per thousand) relative to local, modern precipitation, and (14)C ages 32,000 to more than 47,000 years before present. Sulfate, delta(18)O, delta(2)H, delta(34)S, and delta(18)O-SO(4) concentrations are similar to those found in Madison Aquifer groundwater in South Dakota. Thus, it is proposed that Madison Aquifer source water is also present within the Dakota Aquifer beneath northeastern Nebraska. A simple Darcy equation estimate of groundwater velocities and travel times using reported physical parameters from the Madison and Dakota Aquifers suggests such a migration is plausible. However, discrepancies between (14)C and Darcy age estimates indicate that (14)C ages may not accurately reflect aquifer residence time, due to mixtures of varying aged water.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".