Interactions between groundwater and seasonally ice‐covered lakes: Using water stable isotopes and radon‐222 multilayer mass balance models
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Interactions between lakes and groundwater are of increasing concern for freshwater environmental management but are often poorly characterized. Groundwater inflow to lakes, even at low rates, has proven to be a key in both lake nutrient balances and in determining lake vulnerability to pollution. Although difficult to measure using standard hydrometric methods, significant insight into groundwater–lake interactions has been acquired by studies applying geochemical tracers. However, the use of simple steady‐state, well‐mixed models, and the lack of characterization of lake spatiotemporal variability remain important sources of uncertainty, preventing the characterization of the entire lake hydrological cycle, particularly during ice‐covered periods. In this study, a small groundwater‐connected lake was monitored to determine the annual dynamics of the natural tracers, water stable isotopes and radon‐222, through the implementation of a comprehensive sampling strategy. A multilayer mass balance model was found outperform a well‐mixed, one‐layer model in terms of quantifying groundwater fluxes and their temporal evolution, as well as characterizing vertical differences. Water stable isotopes and radon‐222 were found to provide complementary information on the lake water budget. Radon‐222 has a short response time, and highlights rapid and transient increases in groundwater inflow, but requires a thorough characterization of groundwater radon‐222 activity. Water stable isotopes follow the hydrological cycle of the lake closely and highlight periods when the lake budget is dominated by evaporation versus groundwater inflow, but continuous monitoring of local meteorological parameters is required. Careful compilation of tracer evolution throughout the water column and over the entire year is also very informative. The developed models, which are suitable for detailed, site‐specific studies, allow the quantification of groundwater inflow and internal dynamics during both ice‐free and ice‐covered periods, providing an improved tool for understanding the annual water cycle of lakes.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 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".