ECOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF THREE OKLAHOMA STREAMS IMPACTED BY MINE DRAINAGE: HABITAT AND WATER QUALITY
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Eastern Oklahoma's water resources are impacted by abandoned mine drainage. Passive treatment strategies have been demonstrated to improve water quality at abandoned mines, but watershed reclamation strategies, including a complete assessment of physical habitat degradation of stream ecosystems, are lacking. Mine drainage impacts to three Oklahoma streams were investigated by analyzing water quality, habitat availability, and riffle substrate distribution. Net acidic mine drainage originating from abandoned underground and surface coal mining activities has impacted Pit Creek (Latimer County) for more than 70 years. Beaver and Tar Creeks (Ottawa County) are impacted by net alkaline mine drainage from abandoned lead and zinc mining activities. Overall impact to water quality and habitat availability was assessed. All streams were determined to be impaired by mine drainage originating from discharges, seeps, and leachate derived from mine waste piles. Stream habitat quality varied considerably based on both mining and non-mining related impacts. As a result of this analysis, watershed reclamation strategies, based on passive treatment system design and implementation, will be prioritized and the potential for stream ecosystem recovery evaluated.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".