Hydraulic habitat composition and diversity in rural and urban stream reaches of the North Carolina Piedmont (USA)

Shoffner, Deborah; Royall, Dan

doi:10.1002/rra.1097

Cited by 17 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 42 publications

(129 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This perhaps suggests an overly complex set of existing biotope classifi cations in relation to overlapping hydraulic conditions (Froude number), a point also previously suggested by Clifford et al (2006), Large and Heritage (2007) and Shoffner and Royall (2008). (2) There is a clear issue regarding scaling within the current biotope classifi cations (Table II) which could explain some of the apparent surface roughness overlap of units composed of several smaller components, that are measurable using TLS and also reported using hyperspectral imagery (Marcus, 2002).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Clifford et al (2006) highlight overlap between scarcely perceptible fl ow and smooth boundary turbulent units, rippled units and unbroken standing waves, and chute and broken standing waves. Shoffner and Royall (2008) propose three groupings; glideboil-riffl e, rapid-run and pool-slackwater. Wadeson and Rowntree (1998) and Newson et al (1998) further highlight the fuzzy nature of the hydraulic boundary between biotopes, as defi ned by Froude number.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…More recently the proposed links between hydraulics and the biotope unit have been questioned (Clifford et al, 2006;Shoffner and Royall, 2008). Issues remain, including misclassifi cation in the fi eld (Marcus, 2002), the qualitative and subjective nature of biotope mapping (Clifford et al, 2006;, and the fuzzy nature of biotope boundaries (Legleiter and Goodchild, 2005).…”

Section: Biotopes and Issues With Their Defi Nitionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Mapping hydraulic biotopes using terrestrial laser scan data of water surface properties

Milan

Large

Entwistle

2010

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For more than a decade, habitat mapping using biotopes (in-channel hydraulically-defi ned habitats) has underpinned aquatic conservation in the UK through (a) providing baseline information on system complexity and (b) allowing environmental and ecological change to be monitored and evaluated. The traditional method used is the subjective river habitat or corridor survey. This has recently been revised to include the fl oodplain via GeoRHS, but issues still exist concerning development of a national database due to the labour intensive nature of the data collection, subjectivity issues between samplers, temporal changes, the fuzzy nature of perceived habitats and habitat boundaries. This paper takes an innovative approach to biotope defi nition using high resolution spatial data to defi ne water surface roughness for two representative reaches of the River South Tyne, Cumbria, and the River Rede, Northumberland, UK. Data was collected using a terrestrial laser scanner (TLS) and hydraulic variability simply expressed through assigning a local standard deviation value to a set of adjacent water surface values. Statistical linkage of these data with biotope locations defi ned visually in the fi eld allowed complete mapping of the surveyed reach defi ning habitat and biotope areas to the fi ne scale resolution of the TLS data. Despite issues of data loss due to absorption and transmission through the water, the refl ected signal generated an extremely detailed and objective map of the water surface roughness, which may be compared with known biotope locations as defi ned by visual identifi cation in the fi eld. The TLS accuracy achieved in the present study is comparable with those obtained using hyperspectral imagery: with 84% of the pool/glide/marginal deadwater amalgamated biotope, 88% of riffl es, 57% of runs and 50% of the amalgamated cascade/rapid biotope successfully plotted. It is clear from this exercise that biotope distribution is more complex than previously mapped using subjective techniques, and based upon the water surface roughness delimiters presented in this study, the amalgamation of pools with glides and marginal deadwaters, riffl es with unbroken standing waves, and cascades with rapids, is proposed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Biotopes and Issues With Their Defi Nitionmentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mapping hydraulic biotopes using terrestrial laser scan data of water surface properties

Milan

Large

Entwistle

2010

Earth Surf Processes Landf

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The development of hydraulic complexity within older streams is likely to have important consequences for instream biota. Hydraulic complexity had been shown to be an important aspect in creating habitat diversity, yet few habitat assessments take hydraulic habitat into account (Crowder and Diplas, 2006;Shoffner and Royall, 2008). The geomorphic complexity of entire reaches has been studied to allow comparisons along the 200-year chronosequence to be assessed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The development of hydraulic and geomorphic complexity in recently formed streams in Glacier Bay National Park, Alaska

Klaar

Maddock

Milner

2009

River Research & Apps

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geomorphic and hydraulic complexity within five streams representing 200 years of stream development were examined in Glacier Bay National Park, Alaska. Channel geomorphic units (CGUs) were mapped using a hierarchical approach, which defined stream habitat according to morphological and hydraulic characteristics. Detailed hydraulic assessment within the geomorphic units allowed differences in hydraulic characteristics across the 200-year chronosequence to be documented. Channel geomorphology and hydrology changed as stream age increased. Younger streams were dominated by fast flowing geomorphic units such as rapids and riffles with little hydraulic or landscape diversity. As stream age increased, slower flowing habitat units such as glides and pools became more dominant, resulting in increased geomorphic, hydraulic and landscape diversity. These results suggest that geomorphic and hydraulic complexity develop over time, creating habitat features likely to be favoured by instream biota, enhancing biodiversity and abundance.

show abstract

“…All sites had rough uneven bed surfaces characteristic of an armoured bed. We confirmed our in‐field designation of the hydraulic biotopes by examining the Froude number (Fr), Reynolds number (Re), velocity/depth ratio (⟨ M ⟩/ Z ), shear velocity ( V *) and roughness Reynolds number (Re*) (Jowett, ; Wadeson and Rowntree, ; Shoffner and Royall, ):

normalF normalr = \frac{(⟨⟩, M)}{\sqrt{g Z}}

normalR normale = \frac{(⟨⟩, M) Z}{ν}

V^{*} = \frac{(⟨⟩, M)}{5.75 log ((), \frac{12.3 ⟨Z⟩}{D_{50}})}

{normalR normale}^{*} = \frac{(⟨⟩, M) D_{50}}{ν}

where ⟨ M ⟩ is the patch‐mean velocity, g is the acceleration due to gravity, Z is the mean water depth, D 50 is the median bed particle size and v is the kinematic viscosity of water (10 ‐6 m 2 /s).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hydraulic and Physical Structure of Runs and Glides Following Stream Restoration

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Hydraulic units are often linked to ecological habitat through geomorphic structure, and a better understanding of the turbulent characteristics of the units is needed. Our work examined the near‐bed turbulent structure of runs and glides in a restored river and investigated the physical characteristics that influenced the near‐bed hydraulics in these units. The research was completed in three restored reaches and one reference reach at the Virginia Tech Stream Research, Education, and Management Laboratory. The laboratory is unique because three different restoration treatments were applied contiguously along a stream, and the restoration practices ranged from passive to active. The passive reach included cattle exclusion, while the active reaches included cattle exclusion as well as vegetation plantings, bank sloping and the construction of inset floodplains. Three‐dimensional velocities were measured near the channel bed in run and glide biotopes within the three restored reaches, as well as an upstream reference reach. The velocities were utilized to analyse and compare near‐bed turbulent structure across the reaches. While the restoration activities did not address the channel bed directly, differences in physical structure of the two physical biotopes were observed among restoration treatments, likely because of changes in bank shape and roughness due to vegetation differences. Differences between reference and restored reaches were still evident approximately 3 years after cattle exclusion and construction activities. Few differences were observed in the hydraulic structure between runs and glides, and the near‐bed flow structure in both runs and glides was related to local roughness. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Hydraulic habitat composition and diversity in rural and urban stream reaches of the North Carolina Piedmont (USA)

Cited by 17 publications

References 42 publications

Mapping hydraulic biotopes using terrestrial laser scan data of water surface properties

Mapping hydraulic biotopes using terrestrial laser scan data of water surface properties

The development of hydraulic and geomorphic complexity in recently formed streams in Glacier Bay National Park, Alaska

Hydraulic and Physical Structure of Runs and Glides Following Stream Restoration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About