The long-term response of stream flow to climatic warming in headwater streams of interior AlaskaThis article is one of a selection of papers from The Dynamics of Change in Alaska’s Boreal Forests: Resilience and Vulnerability in Response to Climate Warming.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Warming in the boreal forest of interior Alaska will have fundamental impacts on stream ecosystems through changes in stream hydrology resulting from upslope loss of permafrost, alteration of availability of soil moisture, and the distribution of vegetation. We examined stream flow in three headwater streams of the Caribou–Poker Creeks Research Watershed (CPCRW) in interior Alaska over a 30-year period to determine (i) how stream flow varied among streams draining watersheds with varying extents of permafrost and (ii) evaluate if stream hydrology is changing with loss of permafrost. The three streams drained subcatchments with permafrost extents ranging from 4% to 53%. For each stream, runoff data were analyzed by separating base and storm flow contributions using a local-minimum method and with analysis of flood recession curves. Mean daily runoff during the ice-free season did not significantly vary among streams (mean = 0.57 mm·d–1), although the watersheds with lower permafrost had a greater contribution of base flow. Across years, flow was variable and was related with summer temperature in the watershed with low permafrost and with precipitation in the watershed with high permafrost. With climate warming and loss of permafrost, stream flows will become less responsive to precipitation and headwater streams may become ephemeral.
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 | 0.000 | 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".