Using Water Stable Isotopes in the Unsaturated Zone to Quantify Recharge in Two Contrasted Infiltration Regimes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Core Ideas Soil water stable isotope profiles can be used to quantify groundwater recharge. Climate conditions are recorded in water stable isotope profiles of the unsaturated zone. Soil water isotope profiles provide insight into the seasonality of recharge events. A reliable estimate of recharge is needed for the sustainable management of groundwater resources. Water stable isotope (δ 18 O and δ 2 H) profiles in the unsaturated zone are frequently used to quantify groundwater recharge based on the seasonality of water isotopic compositions in precipitation. A very simple approach consists of integrating the soil water content between peak values of soil water isotopic composition, typically corresponding to precipitation signatures from warm and cold seasons. When precipitation isotopic compositions are available, a conceptual surface water isotopes budget and lumped parameter dispersion model can be computed. These models were applied on two field sites with similar permeable soils with grass cover but contrasting recharge regimes and seasonality, one in the Paris Basin (France) with continuous recharge from autumn to spring and the other in the St. Lawrence Lowlands (Quebec, Canada) with episodic recharge in fall and after snowmelt. For the two sites, the peak‐to‐peak method and isotope surface budget led to comparable recharge intensities. At least at the Paris Basin site, evaporation was shown to slightly modify the average unsaturated zone and hence groundwater isotope composition. The proposed parameterization of isotope fractionation due to evaporation allows qualitative estimation of the fraction of evaporation, at least during the recharge seasons. In spite of its simplifications and limitations, the proposed parsimonious model can give estimates of recharge in a variety of sites even if they are not well characterized, as it benefits from the large availability of monthly isotopic compositions in precipitation.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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 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".