MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Influence of hydro-morphologic variables of forested catchments on the increase in DOC concentration in 36 temperate lakes of eastern Canada

2020· article· en· W3047606169 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniel Houle, Mélissa Khadra, Charles Marty, Suzanne Couture

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Science of The Total Environment · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicMarine and coastal ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à ChicoutimiEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDissolved organic carbonEnvironmental scienceDrainage basinTemperate climateHydrology (agriculture)BorealPrecipitationVegetation (pathology)Water columnSurface waterAquatic ecosystemTemperate rainforestTotal organic carbonEcosystemPhysical geographyEcologyGeologyBiologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the last decades, a worldwide increase in dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentrations has been observed in temperate and boreal lakes. This phenomenon has several detrimental effects on the aquatic life and affect local C geochemical cycles . In this study, we measured DOC concentration in the water column of 36 lakes located in eastern Canada over a period of 35 years (1983–2017) and assessed the influence of climatic, hydrologic and morphometric variables on both DOC concentrations and on the rate of DOC changes (∆DOC). Our data show that morphometric and hydrologic variables have a stronger direct influence on lake water DOC concentrations than vegetation and climatic variables. DOC concentration strongly increased with the drainage ratio and the surface covered by organic deposits, which together explained 59% of the variance. As expected, we observed a significant increase in lake water DOC concentration in 72% of the surveyed lakes, which averaged 20% over the study period. Meanwhile, lake water SO 4 2− concentration decreased by 60%. ∆DOC was poorly influenced by the rate of changes in lake water SO 4 2− as well as by the rate of changes in mean annual air temperature and precipitation. ∆DOC was more related to the vegetation type and the morphometry of the catchment: a model including the percentage of conifers, terrestrial catchment area and ∆Cl yielded a variance explanation of 39%. This shows that the rate of increase was primarily driven by morphometric variables which did not change over the study period.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.166
Teacher spread0.158 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations36
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Science of The Total EnvironmentSame topicMarine and coastal ecosystemsFrench-language works237,207