MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2281836895 · doi:10.3390/w8020042

Using a Geospatial Model to Relate Fluvial Geomorphology to Macroinvertebrate Habitat in a Prairie River—Part 1: Genus-Level Relationships with Geomorphic Typologies

2016· article· en· W2281836895 on OpenAlexaffabout
Anna Meissner, Meghan Carr, Iain D. Phillips, Karl‐Erich Lindenschmidt

Bibliographic record

VenueWater · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
Canadian institutionsGlobal Institute for Water SecurityWater Security AgencyUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFluvialSinuosityGeospatial analysisDigital elevation modelHydrology (agriculture)HabitatEnvironmental scienceSTREAMSEcologyGeographyGeologyGeomorphologyRemote sensing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern river ecosystems undergo constant stress from disturbances such as bank stabilization, channelization, dams, and municipal, agricultural, and industrial water use. As these anthropogenic water requirements persist, more efficient methods of characterizing river reaches are essential. Benthic macroinvertebrates are helpful when evaluating fluvial health, because they are often the first group to react to contaminants that can then be transferred through them to other trophic levels. Hence, the purpose of this research is to use a geospatial model to differentiate instream macroinvertebrate habitats, and determine if the model is a viable method for stream evaluation. Through the use of ArcGIS and digital elevation models, the fluvial geomorphology of the Qu’Appelle River in Saskatchewan (SK) was assessed. Four geomorphological characteristics of the river were isolated (sinuosity, slope, fractal dimension, and stream width) and clustered through Principle Component Analysis (PCA), yielding sets of river reaches with similar geomorphological characteristics, called typologies. These typologies were mapped to form a geospatial model of the river. Macroinvertebrate data were aligned to the locations of the typologies, revealing several relationships with the fluvial geomorphology. A Kruskal-Wallis analysis and post hoc pairwise multiple comparisons were completed with the macroinvertebrate data to pinpoint significant genera, as related to the geospatial model.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.182 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWaterSame topicHydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFrench-language works237,207