Streams with Riparian Forest Buffers versus Impoundments Differ in Discharge and DOM Characteristics for Pasture Catchments in Southern Amazonia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forest to pasture land use change following deforestation in Southern Amazonia can result in changes to stream water quality. However, some pasture streams have riparian forest buffers, while others are dammed for farm ponds. Stream corridor management can have differential effects on hydrology and dissolved organic matter (DOM) characteristics. We examined rainfall-runoff patterns and DOM characteristics in a pasture catchment with a forested riparian buffer, and an adjacent catchment with an impoundment. Total streamflow was 1.5 times higher with the riparian buffer, whereas stormflow represented 20% of total discharge for the dammed stream versus 13% with buffer. Stream corridor management was also the primary factor related to DOM characteristics. In the impounded catchment, DOM was found to be less structurally complex, with lower molecular weight compounds, a lesser degree of humification, and a larger proportion of protein-like DOM. In the catchment with a forested buffer, DOM was dominated by humic-like components, with fluorescence characteristics indicative of DOM derived from humified soil organic matter under native vegetation. Our results suggest that differences in stream corridor management can have important implications for carbon cycling in headwater pasture catchments, and that such changes may have the potential to influence water quality downstream in the Amazon basin.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 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".