Multi-year water balance assessment of a newly constructed wetland, Fort McMurray, Alberta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Oil sands mining in Alberta transforms the boreal landscape of forests and wetlands into open pits, tailings ponds and overburden piles. Whereas reclamation efforts have primarily focused on upland forests, rebuilding wetland systems has recently become a motivation for research. Wetland creation and sustainability in this region is complicated by the sub-humid climate and salinity of underlying mining material. In 2012, Syncrude Canada Ltd. completed the construction of the Sandhill Fen Watershed (SFW), a 52-ha upland-wetland system to evaluate wetland reclamation strategies on soft tailings. SFW includes an active pumping system, upland hummocks, a fen wetland and underdrains. To evaluate the influence of management practices on the hydrology of the system, this study reports the water balance from January 2013 to December 2014, the first 2 years after commissioning. A semi-distributed approach was taken to examine the fluxes and stores of water in uplands and lowlands. Natural and artificial inputs and outputs were measured using a series of precipitation gauges and pumps, and evapotranspiration was quantified using three eddy covariance towers. A series of near surface wells recorded water table position. Both 2013 and 2014 were normal rainfall years, with 2013 having more and 2014 less snow than normal. In 2013, inflow/outflow from pumping was the predominant hydrological fluxes, resulting in considerable variability in water table position and storage changes throughout the summer. In 2014, the artificial addition of water was negligible, yet the water table remained near the surface in lowland locations, suggesting that wetland conditions could be maintained under current conditions. Evapotranspiration rates between uplands and lowlands were similar between years and sites, ranging from 2.2 ± 1.8 to 2.5 ± 1.2 mm/day and were largely controlled by climate. These rates were less than nearby older upland systems, suggesting that water balance partitioning will change as vegetation develops. Comparison between years and with natural systems provides insight on how management practices influence hydrologic dynamics and the overall water balance of the SFW. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.008 | 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".