Sturgeon Bank, Fraser River Delta, BC, Canada: 150 Years of Human Influences on Salt Marsh Sedimentation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Atkins, R.J.; Tidd, M., and Ruffo, G., 2016. Sturgeon Bank, Fraser River Delta, BC, Canada: 150 Years of Human Influence on Salt Marsh Sedimentation. In: Vila-Concejo, A.; Bruce, E.; Kennedy, D.M., and McCarroll, R.J. (eds.), Proceedings of the 14th International Coastal Symposium (Sydney, Australia). Journal of Coastal Research, Special Issue, No. 75, pp. 790–794. Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208.The Fraser River Delta in south western British Columbia, Canada, is a relatively recent geologic feature being only approximately 10,000 years old. The delta environment, and the intertidal banks, are the cumulative effect of flood and sediment discharges over the post-glacial interval. The salt marsh of Sturgeon Bank, on the northwest side of the delta, has been identified as under threat from erosion. The occurrence, cause and extent of erosion have been a subject of speculation, investigation and conclusion for several decades; however, dissenting opinions on the persistence of erosion over the last fifty years are numerous. To explore potential causes of the erosion further, publically available historical datasets of natural phenomena were re-examined relative to records of human activities to enable development of a conceptual model. Historical datasets of natural phenomena included sedimentary geology, post-glacial history, bathymetry, flood discharge records, sediment discharge/basin sediment yield, sediment grain size data, wind-waves, and tides. Human activity, stretching back to the late 1800's, included navigation dredging, aggregate resource dredging, river training, river diversion, flood protection dyking, land-use changes, and ongoing habitat management activities. From this review, a conceptual model of physical constraints on deltaic environments was developed. The various phenomena are discussed, the integration of those phenomena as processes affecting deltaic habitat explored, and potential management strategies identified to address the sedimentary consequences of the last 150 years of human influence on the salt marshes of Sturgeon Bank.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".