Bibliographic record
Abstract
Shallow urban impoundments are known for low water transparency, and generally low water quality. This thesis investigates the effects of land use, management regime, and carp density on the water quality in 4 shallow urban impoundments on the Laurel Creek system in Waterloo, Canada. The focus of this study is to look at how these factors affect suspended solids, total phosphorus, and phytoplankton assemblages within the impoundments. The land upstream of the impoundments is lightly to heavily urbanized. The impoundments differ in how they are managed as well, with the most upstream impoundment being completely drawn-down every year with drastic effects downstream. \n \nClair and Silver Lakes received significantly higher total inorganic solids (TIS) concentrations compared to Laurel Creek Reservoir and Columbia Lake during the study period; however there were no significant differences between the impoundment inlets for total organic solids (TOS) or total phosphorus (TP) concentrations during the same period. \n \nThree of the four impoundments were found to export significantly higher concentrations of TIS; these were Columbia, Clair and Silver Lakes. Additionally, Clair and Silver Lakes exported significantly higher TIS concentrations than both Columbia Lake and Laurel Creek Reservoir. Laurel Creek Reservoir discharged very low TIS concentrations throughout the study period. The same pattern as TIS concentrations was seen for the TOS concentrations leaving the impoundments, with Columbia, Clair, and Silver Lakes having significantly higher outlet TOS concentrations when compared to Laurel Creek Reservoir; additionally Clair and Silver Lakes discharged significantly higher TOS concentrations when compared to Columbia Lake. There were no significant differences among TP concentrations leaving the impoundments during the study period. In general, Laurel Creek Reservoir and Silver Lake discharged the highest phytoplankton densities; while Columbia and Clair Lakes discharged lower densities; however, there was no significant difference in these discharge densities between the different impoundments.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".