2002
DOI: 10.1007/s00267-002-2681-z
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Morphological Comparison of Narrow, Low-Gradient Streams Traversing Wetland Environments to Alluvial Streams

Abstract: Twelve morphological features from research on alluvial streams are compared in four narrow, low-gradient wetland streams located in different geographic regions (Connecticut, Indiana, and Wisconsin, USA). All four reaches differed in morphological characteristics in five of the features compared (consistent bend width, bend cross-sectional shape, riffle width compared to pool width, greatest width directly downstream of riffles, and thalweg location), while three reaches differed in two comparisons (mean radi… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
12
0

Year Published

2007
2007
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
3
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
2
12
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The location and spacing of identified bedforms reported in this paper matched well with visually mapped geomorphic units (including pools and riffles) in the Snake River and their calculated spacing (average of 5.9 channel widths) (Miller et al, 2002). Similarly, the average riffle spacing reported in this paper matches well with previous work that used the bedform differencing technique, including the average riffle spacing of 4.7-7.3 channel widths in small rivers (O'Neill and Abrahams, 1984;Jurmu, 2002) and the average riffle spacing of 5.5-8.8 channel widths in the much larger lower Mississippi River (Harmar et al, 2005). The differences in average riffle spacing among these studies that applied the bedform differencing technique likely result from the inherent variability in channel morphology within and among different rivers and from the method used for selecting the threshold value that delineates bedforms.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…The location and spacing of identified bedforms reported in this paper matched well with visually mapped geomorphic units (including pools and riffles) in the Snake River and their calculated spacing (average of 5.9 channel widths) (Miller et al, 2002). Similarly, the average riffle spacing reported in this paper matches well with previous work that used the bedform differencing technique, including the average riffle spacing of 4.7-7.3 channel widths in small rivers (O'Neill and Abrahams, 1984;Jurmu, 2002) and the average riffle spacing of 5.5-8.8 channel widths in the much larger lower Mississippi River (Harmar et al, 2005). The differences in average riffle spacing among these studies that applied the bedform differencing technique likely result from the inherent variability in channel morphology within and among different rivers and from the method used for selecting the threshold value that delineates bedforms.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 87%
“…Their cross-sectional asymmetry results in higher b values because the rising stage fills a wider proportion of the channel bed before encountering the nearvertical channel banks. Similar channel geometries were observed in several wetland streams across North America by Jurmu and Andrle (1997) and Jurmu (2002).…”
Section: Hydraulic Controlssupporting
confidence: 67%
“…While the general morphology of freshwater peatland channels has been the focus of some research (Garofalo, 1980;Jurmu and Andrle, 1997;Jurmu 2002;Smith and Perez-Arlucea, 2004;Nanson, in press), and the effect of their unusual cross-sectional and bend morphologies on flow patterns has been documented (Nanson, 2009b), their hydraulic geometry has received only modest attention (Watters and Stanley, 1997;Tooth and McCarthy, 2004). Some data are available from tidal salt marshes (e.g., Myrick and Leopold, 1963;Ashley and Zeff, 1988;Zeff, 1988Zeff, , 1999, but, despite similarities between freshwater and estuarine peatland channel geometries, the controls on these systems are obviously very different, particularly with respect to the directions of flow and relative effectiveness of riparian vegetation in providing bank strength.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Their beds are comprised of sand and gravel, peat or basement material (bedrock) and they tend to exhibit slot-like cross-sections. Some research has focused on the cross-sectional and planform geometry of such organic streams (Jurmu and Andrle 1997;Jurmu 2002), however little research has examined their geometry-flow interactions and the relationship between the channels and their associated peatlands.…”
Section: Channelled Peatlandsmentioning
confidence: 99%