MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2950200624 · doi:10.82308/28336

Monitoring and simulating nutrient removal in a constructed wetland

2008· article· en· W2950200624 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anne-Caroline Kroeger

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWetlandEnvironmental sciencePhosphorusNutrientHydrology (agriculture)Surface runoffWatershedWater qualityEutrophicationTributaryConstructed wetlandSurface waterEffluentEnvironmental engineeringWastewaterEcologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Phosphorus contamination of surface waters is a primary water quality concern in the agricultural watershed of Pike River in southern Québec. Surface waters from Walbridge creek, a tributary of the Pike River, were diverted into a small constructed wetland consisting of three basins laid out in series to evaluate nutrient (nitrogen and phosphorus) retention within the system. Hydraulic and nutrient loading rates to the constructed wetland were highly variable in time, with peak rates of loading occurring during runoff events in the watershed, with a mean hydraulic loading rate of 25 cm/day. The wetland retained 8.47 kg total phosphorus, which corresponded to 44 % of total phosphorus inputs (19.3 kg) and it also retained 132.5 kg nitrates, which represented 13 % of nitrate inputs (995 kg) to the wetland, over 4 years (2003-06) of seasonal (May-Nov) operation. Annual mean nutrient retention rates (1.7 g total P m-2 year-1 and 27.3 g NO3- m-2 year-1) were within the range of values reported in the literature for constructed wetlands treating agricultural runoff. This study therefore provided additional evidence supporting the use of small constructed wetlands as nutrient traps in agricultural watersheds in a moderate Canadian climate. A first generation wetland model was also developed using MATLABTM programming language to simulate phosphorus cycling in the wetland. The model was evaluated as a prediction tool of effluent particulate phosphorus and ortho-phosphate concentrations. Much more work needs to be done to improve the accuracy of the model simulations.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.197
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.198 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Same topicConstructed Wetlands for Wastewater TreatmentFrench-language works237,207