Drought-induced changes in groundwater-surface water exchange at Lake Mead area
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study focuses on the Lake Mead region in the southwestern United States, a key water reservoir serving over 25 million people and agricultural lands across several states. The area has experienced recurring anthropogenic droughts since the early 2000s. We investigate the hydrological response of the coupled surface-groundwater system to the 2020–2022 drought, one of the most severe on record. To this end, we use Sentinel-1 Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar (InSAR) data to quantify vertical land motion caused by the elastic response of the crust to water-mass loss in the lake vicinity. Next, we apply an inverse elastic load modeling framework to quantify water loss. We further assess possible hydraulic connectivity between Lake Mead and adjacent groundwater reservoirs. We detect ground uplift of up to 8 mm/yr near the lake center, likely due to crustal rebound from reduced water-mass loading. We estimated the total water storage loss at 3.03 ± 0.25 km 3 /yr across a 3150 km 2 area surrounding Lake Mead. Groundwater accounts for approximately a third of that, being 0.94 ± 0.32 km 3 /yr. In addition, observed time lags of 6–98 days between lake and groundwater level responses, corresponding to a lateral diffusivity of 3.2–86 m 2 /s, suggest spatially variable connectivity between the lake and aquifers. These findings highlight that drought impacts propagate through the subsurface within interconnected systems, resulting in reduced buffering capacity of groundwater resources following droughts, and emphasizing the need for more integrated surface and groundwater management strategies to enhance resilience under climate and anthropogenic stressors. • Groundwater depletion near Lake Mead is ∼1 km 3 /yr during 2020–2022. • Localized elastic load modeling supports groundwater storage loss estimation. • Region’s lateral hydraulic diffusivity ranges from 3.2 to 86 m 2 /s. • Results support the need for an integrated water management approach. • Elastic displacement compared across half-space and spherical Earth models.
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) | 0.001 | 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".