Hydraulic and Physical Structure of Runs and Glides Following Stream Restoration
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 characteris...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | River research and applications 2016-11, Vol.32 (9), p.1890-1901 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 1901 |
---|---|
container_issue | 9 |
container_start_page | 1890 |
container_title | River research and applications |
container_volume | 32 |
creator | Abel, S. Hopkinson, L. C. Hession, W. C. |
description | 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. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1002/rra.3039 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_wiley</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1846400158</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1846400158</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a4249-8a5e76b99552655d0a1817258162364aa9e95a47901b9748a29afe338a81a6d73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpd0F1LwzAUBuAiCs4p-BMK3njTmTTN1-WYrhOGjjrxMpy1mWZmrSYts__e1skEr95AHk5y3iC4xGiEEYpvnIMRQUQeBQNMCY1wwvjx4UzlaXDm_QYhzIUUg2AxawsHjTV5CGURLt5ab3Kw4VPtmrxunA6rdZg1pf-5Tq0ptA-nlbXVzpSvPdOwDTPt68pBbaryPDhZg_X64jeHwfP0bjmZRfPH9H4ynkeQxImMBFDN2UpKSmNGaYEAC8xjKjCLCUsApJYUEi4RXkmeCIglrDUhAgQGVnAyDK73cz9c9dl076ut8bm2FkpdNV5hkbCkW5OKjl79o5uqcWX3u04RKihlgnQq2qudsbpVH85swbUKI9X3qrpeVd-ryrJxn3_e-Fp_HTy4d8U44VS9PKRqIZfpJL6dKUm-AXpceZw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1835855683</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Hydraulic and Physical Structure of Runs and Glides Following Stream Restoration</title><source>Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete</source><creator>Abel, S. ; Hopkinson, L. C. ; Hession, W. C.</creator><creatorcontrib>Abel, S. ; Hopkinson, L. C. ; Hession, W. C.</creatorcontrib><description>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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1535-1459</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1535-1467</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1002/rra.3039</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Bognor Regis: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>Freshwater ; physical biotopes ; river restoration ; runs and glides ; turbulent flow</subject><ispartof>River research and applications, 2016-11, Vol.32 (9), p.1890-1901</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a4249-8a5e76b99552655d0a1817258162364aa9e95a47901b9748a29afe338a81a6d73</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1002%2Frra.3039$$EPDF$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002%2Frra.3039$$EHTML$$P50$$Gwiley$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,1416,27915,27916,45565,45566</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Abel, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hopkinson, L. C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hession, W. C.</creatorcontrib><title>Hydraulic and Physical Structure of Runs and Glides Following Stream Restoration</title><title>River research and applications</title><addtitle>River Res. Applic</addtitle><description>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.</description><subject>Freshwater</subject><subject>physical biotopes</subject><subject>river restoration</subject><subject>runs and glides</subject><subject>turbulent flow</subject><issn>1535-1459</issn><issn>1535-1467</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpd0F1LwzAUBuAiCs4p-BMK3njTmTTN1-WYrhOGjjrxMpy1mWZmrSYts__e1skEr95AHk5y3iC4xGiEEYpvnIMRQUQeBQNMCY1wwvjx4UzlaXDm_QYhzIUUg2AxawsHjTV5CGURLt5ab3Kw4VPtmrxunA6rdZg1pf-5Tq0ptA-nlbXVzpSvPdOwDTPt68pBbaryPDhZg_X64jeHwfP0bjmZRfPH9H4ynkeQxImMBFDN2UpKSmNGaYEAC8xjKjCLCUsApJYUEi4RXkmeCIglrDUhAgQGVnAyDK73cz9c9dl076ut8bm2FkpdNV5hkbCkW5OKjl79o5uqcWX3u04RKihlgnQq2qudsbpVH85swbUKI9X3qrpeVd-ryrJxn3_e-Fp_HTy4d8U44VS9PKRqIZfpJL6dKUm-AXpceZw</recordid><startdate>201611</startdate><enddate>201611</enddate><creator>Abel, S.</creator><creator>Hopkinson, L. C.</creator><creator>Hession, W. C.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>Wiley Subscription Services, Inc</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>7SS</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H95</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201611</creationdate><title>Hydraulic and Physical Structure of Runs and Glides Following Stream Restoration</title><author>Abel, S. ; Hopkinson, L. C. ; Hession, W. C.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a4249-8a5e76b99552655d0a1817258162364aa9e95a47901b9748a29afe338a81a6d73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Freshwater</topic><topic>physical biotopes</topic><topic>river restoration</topic><topic>runs and glides</topic><topic>turbulent flow</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Abel, S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hopkinson, L. C.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hession, W. C.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Entomology Abstracts (Full archive)</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 1: Biological Sciences & Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>River research and applications</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Abel, S.</au><au>Hopkinson, L. C.</au><au>Hession, W. C.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Hydraulic and Physical Structure of Runs and Glides Following Stream Restoration</atitle><jtitle>River research and applications</jtitle><addtitle>River Res. Applic</addtitle><date>2016-11</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>32</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>1890</spage><epage>1901</epage><pages>1890-1901</pages><issn>1535-1459</issn><eissn>1535-1467</eissn><abstract>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.</abstract><cop>Bognor Regis</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1002/rra.3039</doi><tpages>12</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1535-1459 |
ispartof | River research and applications, 2016-11, Vol.32 (9), p.1890-1901 |
issn | 1535-1459 1535-1467 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1846400158 |
source | Wiley Online Library Journals Frontfile Complete |
subjects | Freshwater physical biotopes river restoration runs and glides turbulent flow |
title | Hydraulic and Physical Structure of Runs and Glides Following Stream Restoration |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T04%3A53%3A00IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_wiley&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Hydraulic%20and%20Physical%20Structure%20of%20Runs%20and%20Glides%20Following%20Stream%20Restoration&rft.jtitle=River%20research%20and%20applications&rft.au=Abel,%20S.&rft.date=2016-11&rft.volume=32&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=1890&rft.epage=1901&rft.pages=1890-1901&rft.issn=1535-1459&rft.eissn=1535-1467&rft_id=info:doi/10.1002/rra.3039&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_wiley%3E1846400158%3C/proquest_wiley%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1835855683&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |