The Impact of Land Cover Change on Surface Water Temperature of Small Lakes in Eastern Ontario from 1985 to 2020
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Land Cover Change (LCC) has been shown to significantly impact the magnitude and trend of Land Surface Temperature (LST). However, the influence of LCC near waterbodies outside of an urban environment remain less understood. Waterbodies serve as local climate moderators where nearby LCC has the potential to decrease their cooling ability. Altered water surface temperatures can lead to altered species migration and distribution in aquatic species depending on a given species thermal boundary. In this study, using remotely sensed land cover and surface temperature data, we investigate the role that LCC around small lakes (500 m) plays on the surface water temperature change of nine small lakes in the Cataraqui Region Conservation Authority’s watershed, located in Eastern Ontario, from 1985 to 2020. The Continuous Change Detection Classification (CCDC) algorithm was used alongside the Statistical Mono-Window (SMW) algorithm to calculate LCC and LST, respectively. Results indicated a strong positive relationship (R2 = 0.81) between overall LCC and lake surface water temperature (LSWT) trends, where LSWT trends in all inland small lakes investigated were found to be positive. The land cover class sparse vegetation had a strong positive correlation with water temperature, whereas dense vegetation displayed a strong negative correlation. This 35-year study contributes to the broader understanding of the impact that LCC has on the surface water temperature trends of inland lakes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".