MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4411113692 · doi:10.1021/acs.est.5c04555

Lasting Impacts of Wildfire Retardant on Phosphorus Storage and Downstream Transport in a Rocky Mountain Stream

2025· article· en· W4411113692 on OpenAlexafffund
Madelyn M. Lux, U. Silins, Michael J. Wagner, Jim Fitzpatrick, E. Cherlet, Kirk Hawthorn, Craig Harriott, Micheal Stone, Kathleen M. Beamish, Monica B. Emelko

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Science & Technology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicFire effects on ecosystems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooAlberta Ministry of Agriculture and ForestryUniversity of Alberta
FundersForest Resource Improvement Association of AlbertaAlberta InnovatesParks CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaWeyerhaeuser Company
KeywordsFire retardantEnvironmental sciencePhosphorusDownstream (manufacturing)ChemistryEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

High Resolution Image Download MS PowerPoint Slide Aerial application of fire retardants is a critical tool in wildland fire suppression but can impact aquatic ecosystems if accidentally misapplied into watercourses. However, exceedingly few studies have documented actual water quality impacts of such misapplications. Here, we explore the short- and longer-term effects of an operational misapplication of PHOS-CHEK LC95A into a Rocky Mountain stream on (a) water quality, (b) streambed storage and release potential of soluble reactive phosphorus (SRP), (c) its downstream transport, and (d) effects on periphyton productivity. Two weeks after the retardant drop, streambed SRP and its potential release into the stream were 2.6–3.0 times greater ( p < 0.014) at the drop site than at a reference site above the drop, yet the greatest increases in aqueous stream SRP occurred 1 km downstream of the drop. One year later, while streambed SRP at the drop site declined by 34%, downstream transport of retardant residues and streambed-bound SRP strongly increased streambed and stream SRP 1.5–6.1 km below the retardant drop. The lasting effects of the retardant observed in this study reinforce the importance of continued refinement of air tanker operational guidelines and enhanced operational attention to protecting critical watersheds during fire suppression operations.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Science & Technology→Same topicFire effects on ecosystems→French-language works237,207→