Click

Here

GEOPHYSICAL RESEARCH LETTERS, VOL. 34, L06403, doi:10.1029/2006GL028865, 2007

for

Full
Article

Processes of initiation of motion leading to bedload transport in

gravel-bed rivers
beda,5
Celso Garcia,1 Hai Cohen,2 Ian Reid,3 Albert Rovira,4 Xavier U
2
and Jonathan B. Laronne
Received 6 December 2006; revised 8 February 2007; accepted 19 February 2007; published 23 March 2007.

[1] Transport processes that lead to the initiation of bedload

motion in gravel-bed rivers have not yet been clarified. We
report patch- and grain-scale processes involved in the
initiation of bedload motion in a natural gravel-bed stream as
observed through a series of video experiments. With
increasing flow strength, the phases of initiation of motion
that have been identified are (1) within-patch grain
instability (grain vibration, pivoting, and grain-scale
rolling), (2) within-patch gyratory step-and-rest motion,
and (3) general sediment motion involving downstream
transport from an individual patch and the throughput
of grains inherited from upstream. Citation: Garcia, C.,
beda, and J. B. Laronne
H. Cohen, I. Reid, A. Rovira, X. U
(2007), Processes of initiation of motion leading to bedload
transport in gravel-bed rivers, Geophys. Res. Lett., 34, L06403,
doi:10.1029/2006GL028865.

1. Introduction
[2] Laboratory and field studies have shown that several
properties of gravel beds affect the entrainment of sediment.
These include: grain protrusion and exposure [Fenton and
Abbott, 1977; Raudkivi and Ettema, 1982]; friction angle
[Buffington et al., 1992]; bed packing [Church, 1978]; bed
relief [Laronne and Carson, 1976]; grain imbrication
[Johansson, 1963]; grain clusters [Brayshaw et al., 1983];
and sand content [Wilcock, 1998]. Variation in channel
topography and boundary shear stress lead to sorting of
bed material and to the common formation of surficial
patches of sand, granules and small pebbles that locally
cover part of the armour layer [Lisle and Madej, 1992;
Paola and Seal, 1995]. Patches are accumulations of fine
sediment that are indicative of sediment supply and have
considerable control over the nature of river-bed habitats
[Townsend, 1989; Kondolf and Wolman, 1993], hydraulic
roughness [Dietrich et al., 1989], and, importantly, the
initiation and the texture of bedload [Garcia et al., 1999].
[3] The Shields entrainment function [Shields, 1936;
Miller et al., 1977], defined for near-uniform grains, is the
1
Department of Earth Sciences, University of the Balearic Islands,
Palma de Mallorca, Spain.
2
Department of Geography and Environmental Development, Ben
Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, Israel.
3
Department of Geography, Loughborough University, Loughborough,
UK.
4
Aquatic Ecosystems Unit, Institute of Research for Agriculture and
Food Technology, Sant Carles de la Ra`pita, Spain.
5
Department of Physical Geography, University of Barcelona,
Barcelona, Spain.

Copyright 2007 by the American Geophysical Union.

0094-8276/07/2006GL028865

parameter most commonly used to determine the conditions

at which particle motion is initiated under hydraulically
rough flow typical of gravel-bed rivers. There is an inherent
difficulty in defining initial motion for non-uniform bed
materials, despite the application of a number of other
methods such as (1) extrapolation of a transport relation
to zero or a specified low reference value [Parker and
Klingeman, 1982], (2) visual observation in a flume
[Gilbert, 1914], (3) competence functions based on the
largest mobile grain [Andrews, 1983], and (4) theoretical
force balance equations [White, 1940]. Each of these methods has been deployed with variable and limited success in
particular situations [Carson and Griffiths, 1985]. For
example, the reference value and competence methods are
thought to be more suitable for predicting reach-average
incipient motion and the visual observation method is best
applied to mobility studies of discrete sedimentary patches
[Buffington and Montgomery, 1997]. For two decades,
research on gravel-bed rivers has focused on the important
role that an armour layer plays in initiation of motion and
how its disruption at times of flood releases considerable
amounts of fine bed material from the subsurface [Parker
and Klingeman, 1982]. However, fine bed material is
mobilized from patches prior to that being released from
beneath an armour layer; it is therefore the initial source of
bedload under conditions of initial motion [Laronne et al.,
2001]. Indeed, because of a growing awareness of the areal
segregation of many gravel-bed channels into patches of
differing grain-size, patch dynamics are now receiving
greater attention. It is increasingly apparent that they are
important for the general assessment of bedload flux [Paola
and Seal, 1995] as well as for hydro-ecology (fish habitat,
flushing flows, and minimum flow requirements), especially
in upland rivers [Gibbins et al., 2007].

2. Field Evidence
[4] The processes that lead to motion of grains from bed
patches have been observed through a series of video
experiments conducted on the Tordera River, a perennial
gravel-bed channel located in the Catalan Coastal Ranges,
NE Spain. The experiments were carried out in the reach
immediately upstream from a permanent sediment transport
monitoring station [Garcia et al., 2000]. Images of the river
bed were recorded by deploying a video camera vertically
from a position about 1 m above the water surface. To avoid
distortion of the images by refraction, a PerspexTM viewing
box 2 m long by 1 m wide was placed on the water surface.
Flow velocity was increased artificially in order to induce
sediment motion either by concentrating the flow of water
in the study area using sand bags or by gradually constrict-

L06403

1 of 4

L06403

GARCIA ET AL.: BEDLOAD TRANSPORT IN GRAVEL-BED RIVERS

L06403

Figure 1. (a f) Six images extracted from a video clip showing the processes of initiation of sediment motion in a river
bed patch that eventually lead to bedload motion as flow strength increases. Flow is from right to left. Figure 1a (time 11:59:39) shows a stable patch of fine material in the lee of a protruding cobble. Figure 1b (11:59:44) displays within-patch
instability involving the vibration and small dispacements of individual grains (areas 1 and 2). Figure 1c (11:59:49) displays
within-patch gyratory sediment motion in response to increased flow strength (area 1) and an increase in the number of
rolling particles (area 2). Figure 1d (11:59:56) shows saltation of a few particles out of the patch (areas 1 and 2); pivoting of
comparatively large grains in the downstream portion of the patch (area 3). In Figure 1e (11:59:56) bursts of sediment
movement reflect increasingly active areas within the patch, including the portion previously protected in the lee of the
upstream cobble (area 1). Sediment moves downstream within the patch (areas 2 and 3). Figure 1f (11:59:57) displays
general sediment motion from and through the patch. This is the first net downstream flux signifying conventionally
defined bedload under conditions traditionally considered as just above the threshold of motion.
ing water depth below the viewing box by pushing it
towards the river bed. The viewing box was depressed at
a rate of 4 mm s 1 through a distance of 100 mm, while
maintaining near-parallelism between the plane of the
PerspexTM window and that of the original local watersurface slope. The 3-dimensional rugosity of the channel
bed, established by the cobble-boulder framework clasts
that enclose each fine-grained patch, induces a highly
complex flow structure characterized by significant upstream flow vectors near the bed, amongst other features.
In this context, the dimensions of the viewing box were
scaled to those of the bed patches under investigation rather
than attempting to condition the flow over longer channel
lengths. The accelerated flow under the box induced bedload motion and eventually led to extra-patch bedload
transport. Within a field of view of 0.35 m by 0.45 m, flow
velocity ranged from 0.3 to 0.4 m s 1 during the experiment. The video record of each patch that was subjected to

treatment allowed subsequent analysis of the sequence of

grain- and patch-scale processes (Movie S1 in the auxiliary
material).1
[5] The patch we show in the video-clip had dimensions
of 0.13 by 0.06 m, a mean grain size of 2 mm and a
sediment thickness between 0.05 and 0.08 m. The original
flow depth was 0.35 m over the patch and 0.25 m over the
upstream cobble. Initially, there was no movement; a patch
is usually located in the lee of a protruding clast or a rib-like
structure formed by several such clasts [Laronne and
Carson, 1976] and flow separation protects the finer patch
sediment from turbulence. The patch sediment had an open
structure [Laronne and Carson, 1976], implying low interparticle friction, and little micro-relief (Figures 1a and 2a).

1
Auxiliary materials are available in the HTML. doi:10.1029/
2006GL028865.

2 of 4

L06403

GARCIA ET AL.: BEDLOAD TRANSPORT IN GRAVEL-BED RIVERS

L06403

and 2d) [cf. Drake et al., 1988]. The location of the

transport pathway was fairly consistent and depended on
the geometry of the coarse clasts that formed the downstream boundary of the patch, the exit path being identified
as a saddle between two adjacent grains.

3. Discussion

Figure 2. (a d) Cartoon showing the typical movement of

sand or granule particles in a sediment patch at sequential
phases of increasing flow strength. Flow is from right to
left. Figure 2a (time - 11:59:39), static; Figure 2b
(11:59:44), in situ vibration and spasmodic single hops;
Figure 2c (11:59:49), gyratory step-and-rest movement
within the patch; Figure 2d (11:59:57), extra-patch
displacement i.e., conventionally defined entrainment and
bedload flux.

As flow velocity was increased, instabilities occurred,

including grain vibration [Schumm and Stevens, 1973],
grain pivoting without significant displacement [Allan and
Frostick, 1999] and irregular and occasional hopping of
grains. Eighteen particles moved a mean distance of 0.05 m
from the upstream side of the patch to its center (Figures 1b
and 2b). During the next phase, we observed a giratory
motion of material, the diameter of each gyre being about
0.025 m. During the first few seconds (11:59:49 to
11:59:51), three particles per second moved in saltation;
from 11:59:52 onwards, the number of particles in saltation
increased to eight per second while the indicative flow
velocity was 0.30 m s 1 at 0.05 m above the surface of
the upstream cobble that offers protection to the patch. By
11.59.55, velocity had increased to 0.32 m s 1 and the
number of particles in saltation had increased to 32 per
second, while a mean saltation jump of 50 mm was recorded
(Figures 1c, 1d, and 2c). The gyratory motion was strong
enough to have remobilized fish reds [Wilcock et al., 1996]
and was complemented by increasingly frequent downstream ejections of single grains [Garcia et al., 1996] as
turbulence swept the patch floor in response to the changing
location of flow reattachment at the downstream end of the
separated flow. At 11:59:56, flow velocity reached 0.35 m s 1
and the effects of the first major sweep of the patch were
recorded, with more than 40 particles moved (Figure 1e).
Such particle disturbance is intermittent and associated with
turbulent burst-sweep events during which low-momentum
fluid is ejected toward the outer regions of the flow to be
replaced by high-momentum fluid that sweeps the bed
[Grass, 1983]. The next and final phase was characterised
by extra-patch movement: during this phase, general motion
occurred within the patch and particles were exported
downstream, with bedload movement occurring over an
immobile armour. A few particles slid, many rolled, but
saltation transported most grains downstream (Figures 1f

[6] Observations such as these provide, for the first time,

an indication that bed material disturbance is considerable
during rising flows and well ahead of any conventionally
defined initiation of bedload [Wilcock and McArdell, 1997],
following which there is an expectation of net downstream
flux.
[7] The three phases of fine-grained bedload transport
(Figures 1 and 2) were video-documented in the Tordera in
a number of neighbouring patches having similar characteristics. (In a 50 m reach, as many as 124 patches were
surveyed, an average occurrence of 0.44 m 2). That these
phases condition the amount of downstream sediment
transport in channels where patch bed character is similar
to that of the Tordera is attested by a number of observations
made elsewhere. First, a controlled laboratory flume experiment, in which fine-grained (sand, granule) patch sediments were colour-coded according to size-class (in a
manner reminiscent of that deployed by Wilcock and
McArdell [1993]), revealed not only the three phases of
grain displacement with increasing flow, but also selective
grain entrainment that produced the within-patch downstream coarsening observed in the field by Laronne et al.
[2001] (I. Reid, personal communication, 2007). Second, an
extended field study in Wood Brook, England, a comparatively steep step-pool channel (average slope = 0.033) with
channel-bed character that has affinity with that of the
Tordera, has revealed through the tracing of magneticallytagged patch (i.e., pool) grains that 97 percent of finegrained material of granule-small-pebble calibre is displaced
within-pools by floods that exert values of peak specific
stream power up to 55 W m 2, beyond which there is
significant export of grains downstream from pool to
pool (and beyond). Indeed, during the largest event
recorded, in which specific stream power reached a peak
value of 165 W m 2, 64 percent of the tagged grains were
exported downstream from the pools in which they had
been seeded [Dudley, 2007].
[8] There are a number of implications of this pre-flux
movement. The patch material is hydraulically winnowed,
smaller grains being observed to move to the upstream
portion of a patch and into a position protected by the large
armour layer clasts that define the upstream patch boundary,
while coarser grains remain in the downstream portion
where flow reattachment and impinging eddies are most
likely to cause downstream ejection. Hydraulic rearrangement of the patch sediment also allows it to increase its
packing density, so maximizing the angle of internal friction. These local movements of bed material within-patch
bedload are likely to be a factor contributing to the
considerable unpredictability of bedload in gravel bed rivers
[Garcia et al., 1999; Laronne et al., 2001]. This unpredictability makes it difficult to estimate the consequences of
sediment transport, such as the flushing efficiency of flow
releases designed to maintain a healthy river ecology

3 of 4

L06403

GARCIA ET AL.: BEDLOAD TRANSPORT IN GRAVEL-BED RIVERS

[Wiens, 2002; Crowder and Diplas, 2002] and the sedimentary processes that may threaten benthic life as flood flows
wax and wane [Lancaster et al., 2006]. The pre-flux phases
ultimately leading to conventionally-defined bedload transport are particularly relevant to models of initiation of
motion, to evaluations of in-channel sediment supply of
bedload and, hence, to the prediction of bedload motion
during conditions prior to armour disruption.
[9] Acknowledgments. Funds for the Tordera monitoring station
were granted by the Spanish Ministry of Science and Education, grant
AMB93-0418. Joan Estrany prepared the two figures. We thank Jordi
Perez, So`nia Papell, Mariona Mesull, and Cecilia Corrado for fieldwork
assistance. Comments by two anonymous reviewers helped us to improve
the clarity and completeness of the paper.

References
Allan, A. F., and L. E. Frostick (1999), Framework dilation, winnowing,
and matrix particle size: The behaviour of some sand-gravel mixtures in a
laboratory flume, J. Sediment. Res., 69, 21 26.
Andrews, E. D. (1983), Entrainment of gravel from naturally sorted river
bed material, Geol. Soc. Am. Bull., 94, 1225 1231.
Brayshaw, A. C., L. E. Frostick, and I. Reid (1983), The hydrodynamics of
particle clusters and sediment entrainment in coarse alluvial channels,
Sedimentology, 30, 137 143.
Buffington, J. M., and D. R. Montgomery (1997), A systematic analysis of
eight decades of incipient motion studies, with special reference to gravelbedded rivers, Water Resour. Res., 33, 1993 2029.
Buffington, J. M., W. E. Dietrich, and J. W. Kirchner (1992), Friction angle
measurements on a naturally formed gravel streambed: Implications for
critical boundary shear stress, Water Resour. Res., 28, 411 425.
Carson, M. A., and G. A. Griffiths (1985), Tractive stress and the onset of
bed particle movement in gravel stream channels: Different equations for
different purposes, J. Hydrol., 79, 375 388.
Church, M. (1978), Palaeohydrological reconstructions from a Holocene
valley fill, in Fluvial Sedimentology, edited by A. D. Miall, pp. 743 772,
Can. Soc. of Pet. Geol., Calgary, Alberta, Can.
Crowder, D. W., and P. Diplas (2002), Vorticity and circulation: Spatial
metrics for evaluating flow complexity in stream habitats, Can. J. Fish.
Aquat. Sci., 59, 633 645.
Dietrich, W. E., J. W. Kirchner, H. Ikeda, and F. Iseya (1989), Sediment
supply and the development of the coarse surface layer in gravel-bedded
rivers, Nature, 340, 215 217.
Drake, T. G., R. L. Shreve, W. E. Dietrich, P. J. Whiting, and L. B. Leopold
(1988), Bedload transport of fine gravel observed by motion-picture
photography, J. Fluid Mech., 192, 193 217.
Dudley, J. R. (2007), Channel form, flow, and sediment transport in steep
streams, Ph.D. thesis, Loughborough Univ., Loughborough, UK.
Fenton, J., and J. E. Abbott (1977), Initial movement of grains on a stream bed:
The effect of relative protrusion, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 352, 523 537.
Garcia, C., J. B. Laronne, and M. Sala (1999), Variable source areas of
bedload in a gravel-bed stream, J. Sediment. Res., 69, 27 31.
Garcia, C., J. B. Laronne, and M. Sala (2000), Continuous monitoring of
bedload flux in a mountain gravel-bed river, Geomorphology, 34(1 2),
23 31.
Garcia, M., Y. Nino, and F. Lopez (1996), Laboratory observations of
particle entrainment into suspension by turbulent bursting, in Coherent
Flow Structures in Open Channels, edited by P. J. Ashworth et al.,
pp. 63 86, John Wiley, Hoboken, N. J.
Gibbins, C., D. Vericat, R. J. Batalla, and C. M. Gomez (2007), Shaking
and moving: low rates of sediment transport trigger mass drift of stream
invertebrates, Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci., 64(1), 1 5.

L06403

Gilbert, G. K. (1914), The transportation of debris by running water, U.S.

Geol. Surv. Prof. Pap., 86, 1 263.
Grass, A. J. (1983), The influence of boundary layer turbulence on the
mechanics of sediment transport, in Mechanics of Sediment Transport,
edited by B. M. Sumer and A. Muller, pp. 3 17, Balkema, A. A.,
Brookfield, Vt.
Johansson, C. E. (1963), Orientation of pebbles in running water. A laboratory study, Geogr. Ann., 45, 85 112.
Kondolf, G. M., and M. G. Wolman (1993), The sizes of salmonid spawning gravels, Water Resour. Res., 29, 2275 2285.
Lancaster, J., T. Buffin-Belanger, I. Reid, and S. Rice (2006), Flow- and
substratum-mediated movement by a stream insect, Freshwater Biol., 51,
1053 1069.
Laronne, J. B., and M. A. Carson (1976), Interrelationships between bed
morphology and bed material transport for a small gravel bed channel,
Sedimentology, 23, 67 85.
Laronne, J. B., C. Garcia, and I. Reid (2001), Mobility of patch sediment in
gravel bed streams: Patch character and its implications for bedload, in
Gravel-Bed Rivers V, edited by M. P. Mosley, pp. 249 289, N. Z. Hydrol.
Soc., Wellington.
Lisle, T. E., and M. A. Madej (1992), Spatial variation in armouring in a
channel with high sediment supply, in Dynamics of Gravel-Bed Rivers,
edited by P. Billi et al., pp. 277 293, John Wiley, Hoboken, N. J.
Miller, M. C., I. N. McCave, and P. D. Komar (1977), Threshold of sediment motion under unidirectional currents, Sedimentology, 24, 507 527.
Paola, C., and R. Seal (1995), Grain size patchiness as a cause of selective
deposition and downstream fining, Water Resour. Res., 31, 1395 1408.
Parker, G., and P. C. Klingeman (1982), On why gravel bed streams are
paved, Water Resour. Res., 18, 1409 1423.
Raudkivi, A. J., and R. Ettema (1982), Stability of armour layers in rivers,
J. Hydraul. Div. Am. Soc. Civ. Eng., 108, 1047 1057.
Schumm, S. A., and M. A. Stevens (1973), Abrasion in place: A mechanism
for rounding and size reduction of coarse sediments in rivers, Geology, 1,
37 40.
Shields, A. (1936), Application of similarity principles and turbulence
research to bed-load movement (in German), Mitt. Preuss. Versuchsanst.
Wasserbau Schiffbau, 26, 5 24.
Townsend, C. R. (1989), The patch dynamics concept of stream community
ecology, J. N. Am. Benthological Soc., 8, 36 50.
White, C. M. (1940), The equilibrium of grains on the bed of a stream,
Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 174, 322 338.
Wiens, J. A. (2002), Riverine landscapes: Taking landscape ecology into
the water, Freshwater Biol., 47, 501 515.
Wilcock, P. R. (1998), Two-fraction model of initial sediment motion in
gravel-bed rivers, Science, 280, 410 412.
Wilcock, P. R., and B. W. McArdell (1993), Surface-based fractional transport rates: Mobilization thresholds and partial transport of a sand-gravel
sediment, Water Resour. Res., 29, 1297 1312.
Wilcock, P. R., and B. W. McArdell (1997), Partial transport of sand/gravel
sediment, Water Resour. Res., 33, 235 245.
Wilcock, P. R., A. F. Barta, C. C. Shea, G. M. Kondolf, W. V. Graham
Matthews, and J. Pitlick (1996), Observations of flow and sediment entrainment on a large gravel-bed river, Water Resour. Res., 32, 2897 2909.
H. Cohen and J. B. Laronne, Department of Geography and Environmental Development, Ben Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva,
84105 Israel.
C. Garcia, Department of Earth Sciences, University of the Balearic
Islands, E-07122 Palma de Mallorca, Spain. (celso.garcia@uib.es)
I. Reid, Department of Geography, Loughborough University, Loughborough LE11 3TU, UK.
A. Rovira, Aquatic Ecosystems Unit, Institute of Research for
Agriculture and Food Technology, Postal Box 200, E-43540 Sant Carles
de la Ra`pita, Spain.
beda, Department of Physical Geography, University of Barcelona,
X. U
E-08001 Barcelona, Spain.

4 of 4