Assessing potability of drinking-water sources and quality of surface water on the Reserve of the Six Nations of the Grand River, Ontario (Canada)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although water covers 70% of the earth's surface, less than 1% of it is freshwater that can be used for drinking. Even in Canada, where there is an abundance of freshwater in groundwater and in rivers and lakes, there are many indigenous communities that lack a sustainable source of drinking water. Such is the case for the Six Nations of the Grand River, the largest indigenous Reserve in Canada, located within an hour drive from major urban centers in southern Ontario and where less than 9% of the residents have access to safe, treated potable water. The major tributaries that drain the Six Nations reserve are part of the McKenzie Creek Watershed, which has been characterized as having the highest loading of sediments and nutrients to the lower Grand River, which eventually drains into the eastern basin of Lake Erie. This research project was initiated by the Six Nations community, who wanted an update on the prevalence of fecal contamination in their drinking water sources (wells, cisterns). Secondly, the community wanted to know the ecosystem health status of tributaries flowing through the Six Nations Reserve (McKenzie and Boston Creeks), and to determine if land uses in the watershed were negatively affecting the health of these streams. A study conducted in the summer of 2018 confirmed that 29% of the tap water tested in 75 households were contaminated with E. coli; 40% of the wells and 15% of the cisterns were contaminated and these were distributed throughout the Reserve with no apparent pattern. A study conducted in the summer of 2019 found that the McKenzie Creek was highly polluted with total phosphorus (P), total suspended solids, turbidity and total-ammonia nitrogen (N), while Boston Creek was highly polluted with soluble reactive P and E. coli as well as total-nitrate N. Nitrogen concentrations at 14 stations were highly and significantly related to percentage of agricultural land in catchments. Elevated levels of pollutants have been observed in the two creeks for three decades, indicating that conditions will not improve without remedial actions.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".