Evapotranspiration Dynamics During the Ecosystem Development of a Constructed Upland‐Fen Watershed
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT In recognition of the need for sustainable land use practices, environmental regulations require landscapes affected by resource extraction in the Athabasca Oilsands Region to be reclaimed to their pre‐disturbance functionality. Thus, pilot‐scale watersheds have been constructed to examine the viability of reclamation endeavours in the region. As water availability is a primary driver of ecosystem function, an understanding of water usage and movement during the different phases of ecosystem development is required to ensure successful reclamation. This study captured the evolving evapotranspiration (ET) regime during the initial 7 years post‐construction of a fen‐upland watershed. Both landscapes exhibited significant biophysical evolution, from bare ground to fully vegetated ecosystems. During bare ground conditions, ET was driven by atmospheric and edaphic controls. In the fen, ponded conditions resulted in consistently high rates of surface evaporation throughout the growing season (3.8 mm/day). In contrast to the drier upland, which exhibited limited evaporation rates (1.2 mm/day), punctuated by small increases in response to precipitation events. Once a plant community was well established, edaphic controls decreased, and ET fluxes were largely driven by plant‐mediated responses to atmospheric conditions. In the fen, widespread plant coverage and the establishment of a thick litter layer suppressed surface evaporative losses but increased transpiration, ultimately resulting in lower ET rates (2.5 mm/day). In the upland, the growth and development of treed species resulted in a marked increase in ET rates (2.6 mm/day). These rates are comparable to those of natural landscapes in the region, suggesting successful establishment of ecohydrological function.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".