MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2940168759 · doi:10.1086/703460

Local and landscape influences on turbidity in urban streams: a global approach using citizen scientists

2019· article· en· W2940168759 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueFreshwater Science · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFlood Risk Assessment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationHSBC Bank USA
KeywordsTurbidityUrbanizationDrainage basinGeographyEnvironmental scienceScale (ratio)PopulationEcosystem servicesSTREAMSPhysical geographyHydrology (agriculture)EcologyEcosystemCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The ecological degradation of urban rivers and streams has been termed the ‘urban stream syndrome’ and attributed to increased catchment urbanization. Limiting future degradation requires an understanding of the drivers of reduced water quality at both catchment and site scales. The goal of this study was to identify the probable drivers of turbidity in river ecosystems in highly urbanized areas, under the premise that turbidity does not respond consistently to urbanization. Catchment-scale data were compiled from remotely sensed datasets, whereas local-scale data were collected by citizen scientists as part of the global FreshWater Watch (FWW) program. The local-scale data included nearly 2600 coincident measurements of turbidity and observations of other local characteristics taken with a common method between March 2013 and June 2016 across 127 unique locations in 6 major population centers: Vancouver (Canada), São Paulo (Brazil), Curitiba (Brazil), Buenos Aires (Argentina), Hong Kong SAR (China), and Guangzhou-Foshan (China). Catchment- and site-scale information were modeled with Boosted Regression Trees (BRT) to identify likely drivers of increased turbidity both across the entire dataset and within individual cities. Urbanization was not consistently associated with turbidity. The global BRT model explained 60% of the variation in turbidity, and key predictors were catchment area, % of the catchment as grassland, rainfall, Gross Domestic Product, and % of the catchment as artificial surfaces. City-specific BRT models explained 35–67% of the variation in turbidity. Key predictors varied between cities and were often different than those observed at the global scale. Local-scale data collected by citizen scientists were less predictive of turbidity than catchment-scale factors and explained ~12% of the observed global variability in turbidity. Factors such as riverbank vegetation and the presence of point pollution sources explained some of the variation in turbidity, indicating their management could help mitigate elevated turbidity and sediment load in some urban rivers. Through this high-resolution, site-scale information, we highlight how community-sourced data may add value to freshwater monitoring programs.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it