MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W3161161005 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu21-13916

Hydrological implications of vegetation change in a subarctic, alpine catchment, Yukon Territory, Canada 

2021· article· en· W3161161005 on OpenAlexaffabout
Erin M. Nicholls, G. Drewitt, Sean K. Carey

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubarctic climateEnvironmental scienceShrubClimate changeVegetation (pathology)PrecipitationSnowmeltBorealTaigaEvapotranspirationDrainage basinPhysical geographyGrowing seasonHydrology (agriculture)EcologySurface runoffGeographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a result of altitude and latitude amplified impacts of climate change, widespread alterations in vegetation composition, density and distribution are widely observed across the circumpolar north. The influence of this vegetation change on the timing and magnitude of hydrological fluxes is uncertain, and is confounded by changes driven by increased temperatures and altered precipitation (P) regimes. In northern alpine catchments, quantification of total evapotranspiration (ET) and evaporative partitioning across a range of elevation-based ecosystems is critical for predicting water yield under change, yet remains challenging due to coupled environmental and phenological controls on transpiration (T). In this work, we analyze 6 years of surface energy balance, ET, and sap flow data at three sites along an elevational gradient in a subarctic, alpine catchment near Whitehorse, Yukon Territory, Canada. These sites provide a space-for-time evaluation of vegetation shifts and include: 1) a low-elevation boreal white spruce forest (~20 m), 2) a mid-elevation subalpine taiga comprised of tall willow (Salix) and birch (Betula) shrubs (~1-3 m) and 3) a high-elevation subalpine taiga with shorter shrub cover (< 0.75 m) and moss, lichen, and bare rock. Specific objectives are to 1) evaluate interannual ET dynamics within and among sites under different precipitation regimes , and 2) assess the influence of vegetation type and structure, phenology, soil and meteorological controls on ET dynamics and partitioning. Eddy covariance and sap flow sensors operated year-round at the forest and during the growing season at the mid-elevation site on both willow and birch shrubs for two years. Growing season ET decreased and interannual variability increased with elevation, with June to August ET totals of 250 (±3) mm at Forest, 192 (±9) mm at the tall shrub site, and 180 (± 26) mm at the short shrub site. Comparatively, AET:P ratios were the highest and most variable at the forest (2.4 ± 0.3) and similar at the tall and short shrub (1.2 ± 0.1). At the forest, net radiation was the primary control on ET, and 55% was direct T from white spruce. At the shrub sites, monthly ET rates were similar except during the peak growing season when T at the tall shrub site comprised 89% of ET, resulting in greater total water loss. Soil moisture strongly influenced T at the forest, suggesting the potential for moisture stress, yet not at the shrub sites where there was no moisture limitation. Results indicate that elevation advances in treeline will increase overall ET and lower interannual variability; yet the large water deficit during summer implies a strong reliance on early spring snowmelt recharge to sustain soil moisture. Changes in shrub height and density will increase ET primarily during the mid-growing season. This work supports the assertion that predicted changes in vegetation type and structure will have a considerable impact on water partitioning in northern regions, and will also vary in a multifaceted way in response to changing temperature and P regimes.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies→French-language works237,207→