Spatial and temporal patterns of sediment storage over 45 years in Carnation Creek, BC, a previously glaciated mountain catchment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The movement of sediment through mountain river networks remains difficult to predict, as processes beyond streamflow and particle size are responsible for the entrainment and transport of bedload sediment. In deglaciated catchments, additional complexity arises from glacial impacts on landscape organization. Research to date indicates that the quantity of sediment stored in the channel is an important component of sediment transport in systems which alternate between supply and transport limited states, but limited long‐term field data exist which can capture storage‐transfer dynamics over a timescale encompassing episodic supply typical of mountain streams. We use a 45‐year dataset with annual and decadal‐scale data on sediment storage, channel morphology, and wood loading to investigate the spatial and temporal organization of storage in Carnation Creek, a previously glaciated 11 km2 catchment on Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Sediment is supplied episodically to the channel, including additions from debris flows in the early 1980s just upstream of the studied channel region. Analyzing the spatial and temporal organization of sediment storage along 3.0 km of channel mainstem reveals a characteristic storage wavelength similar to the annual bedload particle travel distance. Over time, two scales of variation in storage are observed: small‐scale fluctuation of 3–10 years corresponding to local erosional and depositional processes, and larger scale response over 25–35 years related to supply of sediment from hillslopes. Complex relationships between storage and sediment transfer (i.e., annual change in storage) are identified, with decadal‐scale hysteresis present in storage‐transfer relations in sites influenced by hillslope sediment and logjams. We propose a conceptual model linking landscape organization to temporal variability in storage and to storage–export cycles. Collectively, our results reaffirm the importance of storage to sediment transport and channel morphology, and highlight the complexity of storage–transport interactions. © 2019 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 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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".