Streamflow is changing in rivers across Alberta: assessing regional variation in changing hydrologic indices
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The flow regime is a crucial factor in the well-being of aquatic and riparian ecosystems. Many components of those ecosystems, ranging for nutrient transport to morphology, are impacted by various hydrologic parameters. The parameters help define and quantify five important hydrologic regime characteristics: magnitude, duration, timing, frequency, and rate of change. Our study utilized the Indicators of Hydrologic Alteration (IHA) indices to (1) determine how various ecologically relevant components of streamflow are changing across Alberta’s various natural regions; and (2) examine the similarities and differences between streamflow trends and climate trends. The overarching goal of these objectives is to create a foundation upon which water management practices can be created or modified. Region-specific water management is required to balance the residential, commercial, and industrial water needs of a particular region with ecological concerns and conservation initiatives. Understanding the trends in hydrologic parameters is an important step in recognizing the vulnerabilities of each region. Streamflow at Water Survey of Canada stations was assessed for linear trends using a Mann-Kendall Trend Analysis. Our approach of assessing overall trends on a regional basis was validated when looking at trends in magnitude. The average daily flow rate for spring and summer months was found to be decreasing in the Boreal Natural Region but increasing in the Grassland Natural Region. Other hydrologic indices were found to exhibit significant trends on a province-wide level. Annual minimum and maximum flow conditions over a variety of durations were observed to be merging across the province. Similarly, the rate of change of streamflow between consecutive days is decreasing across Alberta. To determine whether these results were the function of climate oscillation patterns, a composite analysis was performed to determine the effect of the El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) and Pacific Decadal Oscillation (PDO) on hydrologic indices. Only 8% of parameters were found to be significantly influenced by PDO patterns and 4% influenced by ENSO patterns.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".