MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4220655258 · doi:10.3389/frwa.2021.731642

Assessing Groundwater Dynamics and Hydrological Processes in the Sand River Deposits of the Limpopo River, Mozambique

2022· article· en· W4220655258 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Water · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicGroundwater and Watershed Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
FundersUniversiteit van die Vrystaat
KeywordsGroundwater rechargeHydrology (agriculture)Surface runoffInfiltration (HVAC)AridAquiferGroundwaterGeologyStreamflowPerennial streamSurface waterCurrent (fluid)Environmental scienceDrainage basinGeographySTREAMSEcologyGeotechnical engineeringOceanography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drought and water scarcity constrain the socioeconomic development of many (semi-)arid regions of Southern Africa. Moreover, due to the increase of water withdrawals upstream, the Limpopo River is no longer perennial in Mozambique. Fortunately, its river bed can store significant amounts of freshwater, because of the occurrence of thick and often coarse sand deposits formed through pronounced dryland weathering, erosion, and sedimentation in the river channel. Such so-called “sand rivers” exist in many parts of semi-arid Africa and have varying configurations and hydrological conditions. The current research aims to comparatively assess the Limpopo sand river aquifer in terms of recharge and discharge dynamics, storage potential, and interactions with the surface water flow, as a function of its specific hydrological conditions: its large size, location downstream of a dam releasing permanent ecological flow, and its relatively undeveloped state. For this purpose field investigations were carried out at two sites, involving groundwater level measurements, 2D geoelectrical surveying, water chemical and stable isotope analysis, and sediment classification. These investigations reveal the occurrence of medium to coarse sands with thicknesses that can reach 10–15 m, dropping to 2–5 m in the main river channel, underlain by less permeable clays and silts. Analysis of the river level shows that large parts of the sand river are flooded almost every year, providing optimal conditions for recurring and rapid recharge of the system (confirmed by infiltration tests) through two mechanisms: direct infiltration of surface runoff and lateral flow toward non-flooded areas of the river valley, also confirmed by the chemical and isotope study. During the dry season, groundwater provides base flow to the river and the average water level drop in the sand river system is about 1.8 m. The connectivity with the river margins is limited, due to the clayey nature of the river bank sediment, but local paleochannels can result in a continuation of sand layers. Hydrological processes controlling the water quality are evapoconcentration, mixing of discharging groundwater with the perennial surface water flow, and to a minor extent mineral dissolution, with the groundwater being of Ca-HCO 3 type. The combination of the large size, high permeability, and frequent flooding of the sand river deposits provides optimal conditions for groundwater abstraction, requiring additional assessment of the impact on riparian vegetation and downstream users.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0000.001
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.194 · 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