Analysis of the impacts of climate change, physiographic factors and land use/cover on the spatiotemporal variability of seasonal daily mean flows in southern Quebec (Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The objective of this study is to compare the spatiotemporal variability of seasonal daily mean flows measured in 17 watersheds, grouped into three homogeneous hydroclimatic regions, during the period 1930-2023 in southern Quebec. With regard to spatial variability, unlike extreme daily flows, seasonal daily mean flows are very poorly correlated with physiographic factors and land use and land cover. In fall, they are not correlated with any physiographic or climatic factor. In winter, they are positively correlated with the rainfall and winter daily mean maximum temperatures. In spring, they are strongly correlated positively with the snowfall but negatively with the spring daily mean maximum temperatures. However, in summer, they are better correlated with forest area and, to a lesser extent, with the rainfall. As for their temporal variability, the application of six different statistical tests revealed a general increase in daily mean flows in winter due to early snowmelt and increased rainfall in fall. In summer, flows decreased significantly in the snowiest hydroclimatic region on the south shore due to the decrease in the snowfall. In spring, no significant change in flows was globally observed in the three hydroclimatic regions despite the decrease in the snowfall due to the increase in the rainfall. In fall, flows increased significantly south of 47°N on both shores due to the increase in the rainfall. This study demonstrates that, unlike extreme flows, the temporal variability of seasonal daily average flows is exclusively influenced by climatic variables in southern Quebec. Due to this influence, seasonal daily mean flows thus appear to be the best indicator for monitoring the impacts of changes in precipitation regimes and seasonal temperatures on river flows in southern Quebec.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".