Rapid Recent Recovery from Acidic Deposition in Central Ontario Lakes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In many regions, chemical recovery in lakes from acidic deposition has been generally slower than expected due to a variety of factors, including continued soil acidification, climate-induced sulphate (SO4) loading to lakes and increases in organic acidity. In central Ontario, Canada, atmospheric sulphur (S) deposition decreased by approximately two-thirds between 1982 and 2015, with half of this reduction occurring between 2005 and 2015. Chemical recovery in the seven lakes was limited prior to 2005, with only small increases in pH, Gran alkalinity and charge-balance ANC (acid-neutralizing capacity). This was because lake SO4 concentrations closely followed changes in S deposition, and decreases in base cation concentration closely matched declines in SO4. However, decreases in S deposition and lake SO4 were more pronounced post-2005, and much smaller decreases in lake base cation concentrations relative to SO4 resulted in large and rapid increases in pH, alkalinity and ANC. Dissolved organic carbon concentrations in lakes increased over the study period, but had a limited effect on lake recovery. Clear chemical recovery of these lakes only occurred after 2005, coinciding with a period of dramatic declines in S deposition.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".