Root colonisation effects on the key hydrogeological properties of a reclamation cover with an elevated water table
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The performance of reclamation cover systems could be affected by the colonization of plant roots, which may modify the hydrogeological properties of the construction materials. A four-year field investigation was conducted using six experimental cells with various soil layering designs over AMD-generating tailings reclaimed with an oxygen-barrier cover combined with an elevated water table. Both herbaceous and woody vegetation were installed on top of the cells to compare the influence on the properties of the cover material. Consecutive and undisturbed cores were collected from the cover’s functional layer in 2020 and 2021, respectively. Root parameters, such as root length density, and hydrogeological properties were measured on the core samples to assess the possible relationships between the two categories of variables. Root observation trenches were also cut in each cell to better analyze the root density and occurrence profiles. Results showed that, within the four-year monitoring period of the study, both herbaceous and woody vegetation roots mostly colonized the top overburden layer of the cell (>86% visible roots) and barely occupied the functional layer of the reclamation cover (<10% visible roots). The observed maximum desorption rates for the functional layer were lower than the predicted values, which could be a short-term effect of the fine roots. No significant impact of roots on the main hydrogeological variables controlling the oxygen barrier efficiency were noted. At the end of the four-year study period, the hydrogeological behavior of the functional layer in all cells with/without vegetation/additional soil layers was found to be similar.
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".