MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213458549 · doi:10.1002/hyp.14528

Investigating hydrologic controls on 26 Precambrian shield catchments using landscape, isotope tracer and flow metrics

2022· article· en· W4213458549 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Arghavan Tafvizi, April L. James, Huaxia Yao, Tricia Stadnyk, Charles W. Ramcharan

Bibliographic record

VenueHydrological Processes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of CalgaryMinistry of EnvironmentMinistry of the Environment, Conservation and ParksNipissing UniversityLaurentian University
FundersScience and Engineering Research CouncilNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaGovernment of OntarioCanada Research ChairsOntario Trillium FoundationCanada Foundation for InnovationNipissing University
KeywordsHydrology (agriculture)Drainage basinWatershedStreamflowPrecambrianWetlandGeologyPrincipal component analysisStructural basinEnvironmental sciencePhysical geographyGeographyGeomorphologyEcologyCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Although many studies focus on catchment classification, hydrologists are challenged to find the most important variables for a meaningful catchment classification, especially in the heterogeneous environment of the Precambrian Shield. This study investigates landscape controls on hydrologic response by conducting a catchment classification of 26 catchments located within two Precambrian Shield watersheds (Sturgeon–French–Nipissing [SNF] and Muskoka) in central and Northeastern Ontario, Canada, using combinations of landscape characteristics (e.g. topography, geology, landcover), hydrometric variables, and stable isotopes of δ 18 O and δ 2 H in river flow. Weekly to monthly surveys of δ 18 O and δ 2 H in river flow were collected between 2013 and 2019. Flow metrics (e.g. Pardé coefficient and coefficient of variation of streamflow) were generated for 14 of the 26 rivers between 2008 and 2018. Principal component analyses (PCA) and Hierarchical Clustering on Principal Components (HCPC) analyses were used to identify variables controlling catchment clustering according to their similarities for four different scenarios. Despite their similar location along the southern edge of the Precambrian Shield, the 26 catchments generally clustered by watershed (SNF and Muskoka) with some exceptions. Differences in wetland and lake area (%), mean slope, and % area covered by glacialacustrine and glaciofluvial outwash deposits were the most influential variables in catchment classification. A positive correlation between % wetland area and streamflow stable isotope damping ratios suggests greater % wetland area (with shallow and potentially seasonally variable surface areas and/or hydrologic connection) observed in the SNF catchments increases variability in the influence of evaporative enrichment in SNF catchments. The catchment classification analyses in combination with stable isotopes of δ 18 O and δ 2 H were functional tools to investigate the combined influences of diverse types of catchment characteristics that lead to differences in hydrometric response. These results could support future studies focusing on generating hydrologic models and representing wetlands connectivity in the region.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.630
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHydrological ProcessesSame topicHydrology and Watershed Management StudiesFrench-language works237,207