An integrated assessment of impacts to ecosystem services associated with prairie pothole wetland drainage quantifying wide-ranging losses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In many regions, a tradeoff exists between draining wetlands to support the expansion of agricultural land, and conserving wetlands to maintain their valuable ecosystem services. Decisions about wetland drainage are often made without identifying the impacts on the services these systems provide. We address this gap through a novel assessment of impacts on ecosystem services via wetland drainage in the Canadian prairie landscape. Draining pothole wetlands has large impacts, but sensitivity varies among the indicators considered. Loss of water storage increased the magnitude of median annual flows, but absolute increases with drainage were higher for larger, less frequent events. Total phosphorus exports increased in concert with streamflow. Our analysis suggested disproportionate riparian habitat losses with the first 30% of wetland area drained. Dabbling ducks and wetland-associated bird abundances respond strongly to the loss of small wetland ponds; abundances were predicted to decrease by half with the loss of only 20%–40% of wetland area. This approach to evaluating changes to key wetland ecosystem services in a large region where wetland drainage is ongoing can be used with an economic valuation of the drainage impacts, which should be weighed against the benefits associated with agricultural expansion.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".