Conception de bandes riveraines et de retenues collinaires à l’aide de la modélisation hydrologique distribuée et évaluation de l’impact de ces aménagements sur la charge en sédiments.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’effet de bandes riveraines à largeur réglementaire (2 m sur le talus pour la zone d’étude), de l’ajout de bandes élargies et de retenues collinaires ainsi que du type de culture sur la charge en sédiments du bassin versant du ruisseau au Castor (12 km²) situé en Montérégie, Québec, Canada, a été évalué. Pour ce faire, la plateforme de modélisation hydrologique distribuée PHYSITEL/HYDROTEL a été utilisée, à laquelle ont été couplés le modèle de bande riveraine VFDM, le modèle d’érosion GerosM et le modèle d’acheminement des sédiments en rivière ROTO. Également, un module de retenue collinaire a été ajouté directement au code d’HYDROTEL. Afin d’améliorer les performances d’HYDROTEL à simuler les débits observés, un module de drainage souterrain y a été ajouté. La modélisation montre que par rapport à un scénario sans bandes riveraines, la présence de bandes de 2 m de largeur permet une réduction de 88% des matières en suspension à l’exutoire. Les bandes riveraines élargies permettent de diminuer l’accumulation de sédiments dans les tronçons, ce qui laisse présager une diminution de la problématique de l’envasement des sorties de drain. Les retenues collinaires permettent de capter entre 7 et 11% des sédiments d’origine terrestre en plus d’offrir une réserve d’eau pour l’irrigation. La quantité de sédiments produits augmente ou diminue du tiers selon le type de cultures sélectionné. Ces résultats demeurent vraisemblables pour des bassins versants de tailles, topographie (incluant géomorphologie des cours d’eau), types de sols, configurations (ex. : dispositions spatiales des champs), aménagements hydroagricoles (ex. : avaloirs, drains souterrains), pratiques culturales (ex., superficies cultivées, types de cultures) et de conditions hydrométéorologiques très similaires. The effect of existing riparian buffers, the addition of extended buffers and farm ponds, and the type of crops on the sediment load of the Montérégie Beaver Creek watershed (12 km²) Québec, Canada, was assessed. To do so, the PHYSITEL/HYDROTEL distributed hydrological modeling platform was used, to which the VFDM riparian buffer model, the GerosM erosion model and the ROTO sediment routing model were coupled. Also, a farm pond module was added directly to the HYDROTEL code. To improve the performance of HYDROTEL in simulating observed flows, a subsurface drainage module was added. Modelling shows that compared to a scenario without riparian buffer strips, the presence of 2 m wide strips allows a reduction of 88% of suspended solids at the outlet. Expanded riparian buffer strips reduce the accumulation of sediment in the reaches, which suggests a reduction in the problem of siltation at the drain outlets. Farm ponds capture between 7 and 11% of the land-based sediment and provide a water supply for irrigation. The amount of sediment produced increases or decreases by one-third depending on the type of crop selected. Results of this study are likely transferable to other watersheds of similar size, topography (including river geomorphology), soil types, configurations (e.g., spatial field distribution), agricultural water infrastructures (e.g., subsurface drainage, field inlets), crop practices (e.g., types of crops, cultivated area) and hydrometeorological conditions.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".