MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408429765 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu25-14933

Hydrologic Cycle Impacts of Large-Scale Reforestation at Global and Regional Scales

2025· preprint· en· W4408429765 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marzieh Mortezapour, Kirsten Zickfeld, Vivek K. Arora

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change CanadaUniversity of VictoriaSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReforestationScale (ratio)Water cycleEnvironmental scienceGeographyAgroforestryCartographyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reforestation is a key nature-based solution for mitigating climate change. However, changes in land cover through reforestation can significantly influence the climate and hydrological cycle, affecting water availability and other critical components of the Earth system. Understanding these impacts is essential for developing effective climate adaptation strategies and ensuring sustainable land management in the coming decades.This study leverages simulations with the Canadian Earth System Model (CanESM5.1), a state-of-the-art Earth system model, to quantify hydrological responses to two large-scale reforestation scenarios. The first scenario reverses historical deforestation, restoring tree cover to pre-industrial levels by the year 2070, while the second implements a sustainable reforestation strategy by the same year. To isolate the effects of reforestation, a reference simulation with land-cover fixed at the year 2015 configuration is also conducted. The study employs a two-stage simulation framework—historical (1850–2015) and future (2015–2200)—with multiple ensemble members, using SSP1-2.6 forcing to align with the Paris Agreement’s climate goals.Preliminary results reveal that large-scale reforestation induces statistically significant climate and hydrological responses at both regional and global scales. These findings highlight the potential for unintended consequences of land-based climate mitigation strategies, emphasizing the need for holistic assessments to guide future land management and policy decisions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.582
Threshold uncertainty score0.840

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHydrology and Watershed Management Studies→French-language works237,207→