net/publication/232607559
CITATIONS READS
19 2,051
2 authors:
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
All content following this page was uploaded by Richard Marston on 20 May 2014.
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
Additional services and information for Progress in Physical Geography can be found at:
Subscriptions: http://ppg.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
What is This?
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Article
Progress in Physical Geography
1–29
Process–form linkages in ª The Author(s) 2012
Reprints and permission:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
meander morphodynamics: DOI: 10.1177/0309133312451989
ppg.sagepub.com
Bridging theoretical modeling
and real world complexity
_
Inci Güneralp
Texas A&M University, USA
Richard A. Marston
Kansas State University, USA
Abstract
Meandering rivers are one of the most dynamic earth-surface systems. They play an important role in
terrestrial-sediment fluxes, landscape evolution, and the dynamics of riverine ecosystems. Meandering rivers
have been of fundamental interest to researchers across a wide range of disciplines, from fluvial geomorphol-
ogy to fluid mechanics, from river engineering to landscape ecology, owing to the intriguing complexity of
meander morphodynamics. This interest also comes from the socio-economic concerns due to the river
hazards caused by bank erosion, channel change, and flooding, as well as the adverse responses of meandering
rivers to human- and climate-induced changes in the environmental conditions. An in-depth, process-based
understanding of the dynamics of meandering river–floodplain systems is critical in order to investigate the
responses of these systems to the changes in environmental conditions. Over the last few decades, there
have been significant advances in river meandering research, with contributions from both theoretical mod-
eling and experimental and field-based research. This paper presents a detailed overview of river meandering
research, particularly focusing on the advances in the process-based understanding of meander morphody-
namics. It also discusses the standing challenges in addressing the dynamics of real meandering rivers and their
floodplain patterns and processes, and potential future directions in river meandering research. The paper
advocates the crucial need for bridging theoretical modeling with field- and laboratory-based research in
order to inform accurate assessments of river-hazard risks and facilitate ecologically sound river-
management and restoration practices with the aim of supporting healthy ecosystems.
Keywords
environmental change, floodplain, fluvial geomorphology, meander, modeling, morphodynamics, process-
based
I Introduction
Although only about 0.006% of the freshwater
on the Earth is found in rivers, they are one of
Corresponding author:
the major agents sculpting the Earth’s surface. _Inci Güneralp, Texas A&M University, 810 Eller O&M
Rivers play a vital role in the Earth’s hydrologi- Building, College Station, TX 77843, USA
cal, biological, and geomorphological processes Email: iguneralp@geos.tamu.edu
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
2 Progress in Physical Geography
Figure 1. Planform of a reach of freely meandering Rio Juruá, Brazil (from 6 45’37.18’’S, 70 49’36.57’’W to
6 41’33.53’’S, 69 53’54.28’’W). The image shows a portion of the reach (obtained from Landsat 7 ETMþ
1999, SWIR, Bands 7,4,2 as RGB). The channel planform is composed of simple bends and complex meander
forms such as compound loops, also called multilobed meanders. The crescent shape lakes seen on the image
are oxbow lakes that are formed by cutoff processes. Flow direction is from left to right. The plot on the left
shows the corresponding planform-curvature series, where simple bends have only one curvature maximum
(e.g. bends 1, 3–4, 7–9) whereas compound loops have multiple distinct curvature maxima (e.g. bends 2, 5–6).
(e.g. Poole, 2002; Ward, 1997). Operating like a or morphological characteristics; instead, they
conveyor belt, they transport freshwater as well progressively evolve by migrating over their
as sediment and various important chemical floodplains (Hooke, 1984). The floodplains of
components collected from the land to the water meandering rivers exhibit highly heterogeneous
reservoirs such as lakes, seas, and oceans. Riv- landscapes, consisting of a variety of channel
ers provide habitat for aquatic plant and animal morphologies and floodplain landforms, such
species. Most terrestrial species also depend on as oxbow lakes, meander scars, and scroll bars
a river ecosystem at some point during their life (Figure 1), which creates an intricate sedimen-
cycle. Since the dawn of civilization, rivers tary structure and provides diverse in-channel
have had significance for human settlements, and floodplain ecosystem habitats.
by offering water for irrigation, households, and Meandering rivers have been of fundamental
industry, and the fertile land around them for interest to a wide range of scientific disciplines
agriculture, and by serving as transportation for more than a century (Jefferson, 1902;
routes and for recreational activities. Thomson, 1876), from fluvial geomorphology
Meandering is one of the most common (e.g. Brice, 1974; Dietrich et al., 1979; Hickin,
river-channel patterns (Figure 1). Meandering 1974; Hooke, 1984, 2007b; Leopold and Wol-
rivers are intrinsically dynamic earth-surface man, 1960; Schumm, 1967; Tinkler, 1970) to
systems. Freely meandering rivers in broad allu- fluid mechanics (e.g. Callander, 1978; Einstein
vial floodplains rarely exhibit a stability of form and Shen, 1964; Engelund, 1974; Seminara,
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Güneralp and Marston 3
2006); from river engineering (e.g. Elliot, 1984; Environmental changes and the adverse
Jansen et al., 1979) to landscape ecology (e.g. responses of meandering river–floodplain sys-
Greco and Plant, 2003; Robertson, 2006; Salo tems to these changes also raise concerns.
et al., 1986), to petroleum engineering (e.g. Migration dynamics are highly influenced by
Henriquez et al., 1990; Swanson, 1993). The spatial and temporal variability in environmen-
scientific interest to river meandering is mostly tal conditions. Human-induced environmental
due to the intriguing morphodynamics of mean- changes (e.g. in-channel and landscape modifi-
ders and the role of these dynamics in terrestrial cations by protective measures, agriculture, and
sediment fluxes (Odgaard, 1987; Zinger et al., urbanization on or around floodplain land-
2011), floodplain development and evolution scapes) and climate change alter flow regime,
(Lauer and Parker, 2008; Peakall et al., 2007; floodplain-erodibility characteristics, and
Van De Wiel et al., 2007), and riverine- sediment-transport rates, and thus can signifi-
ecosystems processes (Amoros and Bornette, cantly affect the patterns of channel evolution
2002; Kalliola and Puhakka, 1988; Nanson and and floodplain vegetation patterns and pro-
Beach, 1977; Ward et al., 2002). cesses. Moreover, the alterations in river–flood-
River-meandering processes have been plain system functioning can lead to a decrease
examined across spatial and temporal scales in hydrologic connectivity and a degradation of
ranging from small-space scale processes such water quality, which in turn lead to a decline in
as the interactions among flow structure, the abundance and diversity of riparian and
sediment transport, and bed morphology in riverine habitats.
individual bends (e.g. Dietrich et al., 1984; An in-depth, process-based understanding of
Frothingham and Rhoads, 2003) to large-space the feedbacks between the morphodynamics of
scale processes such as the planform evolution a meandering river and its floodplain patterns
of a series of meander bends (e.g. Gautier and processes is crucial to determine the
et al., 2010; Güneralp, 2007; Hooke, 2007b); responses of the meandering river–floodplain
from short-timescale processes such as system to the variability in environmental con-
channel-bar dynamics occurring over a few ditions. This knowledge allows for identifying
decades (e.g. Hooke and Yorke, 2011) to long- the extent of the influence of specific control-
timescale processes such as landscape evolution ling factors (e.g. the magnitude of variability
over hundreds to thousands of years (e.g. in environmental conditions, decisions on river
Camporeale et al., 2005; Frascati and Lanzoni, and land management, and climate change) on
2009; Howard, 1996; Sun et al., 2001b). The both short- and long-term system trajectories.
migration dynamics of meandering rivers also Therefore, it is necessary for informing accurate
create socio-economic concerns due to the assessments of river-hazard risks and facilitat-
hazards associated with bank erosion, chan- ing the development of effective and ecologi-
nel change, and flooding (Girvetz and Greco, cally sound management and restoration of
2007; Greco et al., 2008; Güneralp and meandering rivers and their riverine landscapes
Rhoads, 2009a; Kondolf, 2006; Lagasse in a changing environment due to human modi-
et al., 2004; Larsen and Greco, 2002; Piégay fications and future climate change.
et al., 2005). These concerns may lead to the The purpose of this paper is to give an over-
development of protective measures against view of the progression of river-meandering
such hazards (e.g. bank protection against research. The paper specifically focuses on the
migration, land protection against flooding advances in the process-based understanding
by dam and levee constructions, dredging for of meander morphodynamics. First, it briefly
navigational improvement). introduces fluid-dynamic and morphodynamic
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
4 Progress in Physical Geography
Figure 2. Planform characteristics of a meandering river. The inflection points represent the locations where
the direction of the channel curvature reverses.
characteristics of meandering rivers, and then and equal to one-half the meander width), and
presents the advances in modeling the process– channel width 2b (Figure 2). Channel curvature
form linkages in river meandering. Next, it C shows the degree of change in the direction of
discusses the issues and challenges in river- a channel along its streamwise axis, whereas an
meandering research in addressing the complex- inflection point marks the location where the
ity in the dynamics of meandering rivers. Finally, direction of channel curvature reverses (i.e.
it concludes with potential future directions for transition from one meander bend to the next
research, emphasizing the importance of studies occurs) (Figures 1 and 2). Curvature is good
on the integrated dynamics of meandering rivers indicator of meander complexity (i.e. the intri-
and other earth-surface systems, as well as the cacy of the shape of meander bends). Intricate
pressing need for developing a framework inte- meander morphologies such as compound loops
grating theoretical modeling and field-based (Howard, 1996; Sun et al., 1996), also called
approaches. multilobed meanders, are characteristic exam-
ples of complex meanders. A compound loop
II Toward a theory of the linkages is an elongated meander with multiple lobes
characterized by multiple absolute maxima in
between meander form and its planform curvature series (Brice, 1974;
meander-migration process Frothingham and Rhoads, 2003; Hooke and
Meander planform can be defined quantitatively Harvey, 1983). On the other hand, a simple bend
by meander sinuosity S (i.e. the ratio of curvi- is a single-lobed meander, which has a single
linear length of the river to the valley length), absolute maximum in its curvature series
meander wavelengths and C (i.e. linear and (Figure 1).
curvilinear lengths between the apexes or the The planform evolution of meandering rivers
first inflection points of successive bends on the occurs as a result of mutual adjustments
same side of the river, respectively), meander between meandering form and processes. The
amplitude 2A (i.e. where A is bend amplitude interactions among river-flow (Hooke, 1975;
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Güneralp and Marston 5
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
6 Progress in Physical Geography
Figure 4. (A) Meander bend planimetries simulated with first-order model (Ikeda et al., 1981) which links the
excess near-bank velocity to local and spatially distributed upstream curvature of the channel planform and
can generate the development of fattening and upstream skewness (i.e. Kinoshita curve) – two fundamental
characteristics of meander form. (B) Examples of upstream skewed meanders on real rivers, from left to
right: the Trinity River, Texas, USA (30 7’47.63’’N, 94 48’54.73’’W), the White River, Arkansas, USA
(35 15’36.39’’N, 91 22’30.47’’W), and Rio Purus, Brazil (7 39’12.41’’S, 66 30’8.05’’W). The red dots mark
the inflection points at which the curvature reverses. Flow direction is from left to right.
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Güneralp and Marston 7
resistance and controls its spatial extent (i.e. the (Hooke, 1995; Lewis and Lewin, 1983); or via
spatial memory of the river) (Furbish, 1991; the downstream extension of an embayment
Güneralp and Rhoads, 2009b; Howard and (i.e. an indentation) at the upstream part of a
Knutson, 1984; Smith and McLean, 1984). In meander bend along a large river with uniform
fact, a slow decay (i.e. long morphodynamic floodplain topography (Constantine et al., 2010).
influence or spatial memory) in the upstream cur- A cutoff meander bend, produced by either
vature influence caused by a low flow resistance neck or chute cutoff, is not abandoned immedi-
leads to an increase in the downstream transla- ately; it stays connected to the main channel fully
tion and upstream skewness of meander bends or partially until sediment deposition closes off
(Güneralp and Rhoads, 2009b). In other words, its entrance and exit, creating an oxbow lake
the spatial extent of the influence in the upstream (Figure 1). The infilling of an oxbow lake is
direction determines the delay in the spatial controlled by the character of the sediment
response (i.e. migration) of the river that imparts transported during high flows, the magnitude and
a downstream component to the migration pat- frequency of these flows, and the distance
tern (Howard, 1984; Parker et al., 1982; Zolezzi between the abandoned and present channels
and Seminara, 2001). This spatially delayed (Erskine et al., 1992). Over time, oxbow lakes are
response is the reason for bank erosion becoming filled mostly with fine sediment deposits and
concentrated against the cutback downstream of form sediment plugs (i.e. clay plugs), which are
the bend apex where downstream increases in highly resistant to erosion (Hooke, 2004).
bed-shear stress near the cutbank are the greatest A dynamic meandering river oscillates
(Whiting and Dietrich, 1993a, 1993b). between meander migration and cutoff events
The knowledge on the physical processes and maintains a statistically steady-state (Cam-
leading to the occurrence of cutoffs is limited poreale et al., 2005; Frascati and Lanzoni, 2010;
due to their infrequent nature and the wide range Hooke, 2004; Stølum, 1996). Through planform
of hydro-geomorphic conditions governing migration and cutoff processes, meandering
floodplain patterns and processes (Hooke, rivers mobilize stored floodplain sediment and
1995, 2004). A cutoff process is generally continually rework it. Reworking of the sedi-
defined as neck cutoff when the meander neck ment gives rise to the segregated and compli-
is shorter than one channel width. The neck of cated structure of the sedimentary deposits
an elongated meander may become increasingly with different erodibility characteristics. Both
narrow due to progressive migration of the the high-frequency variations in channel curva-
upstream and downstream bends and doubles ture and the variability in floodplain erodibility
back upon itself leading to neck cutoff (Allen, can contribute to the emergence of complex
1965; Erskine et al., 1992; Fares, 2000; Hooke, meander morphologies and cause increasing
1995). Conversely, a chute cutoff develops irregularity in planform geometry (Güneralp
through the incision of a new channel across the and Rhoads, 2011; Howard, 1992, 1996;
neck of a meander bend. Chute cutoffs com- Howard and Knutson, 1984; Sun et al., 1996,
monly develop in the presence of remnants of 2001a, 2001b).
old abandoned channels on the floodplain (e.g.
meander bends with ridge and swale topogra-
phy), which can provide flow-routing paths and
III Modeling the morphodynamics
channelize the overbank flow (Bridge et al., of meandering rivers
1986; Hickin and Nanson, 1975); during over- Empirical studies have contributed to the
bank flows capable of cutting a new, shallow general theory of meander migration, which
side channel across the neck of a meander bend provided the basis for the development of
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
8 Progress in Physical Geography
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Güneralp and Marston 9
Figure 5. Influence of local curvature on migration rates. Development of typical meander bends on the
Beatton River, Canada: upstream skewed bends (1–3), downstream skewed bends (4–6), compound loops
or multilobed meander (2–3 and 5–6). Dashed line shows the previous channel position whereas arrowed
paths represent the direction of channel migration (i.e. erosional pathlines).
Source: Modified from Hickin (1974). Reproduced with permission from the American Journal of Science.
between meander form and migration obtained improving the understanding of the linkages
through the pioneering field evidence by Hickin among physical processes governing meander
and Nanson (Hickin, 1974; Hickin and Nanson, dynamics, the character of morphodynamic
1975, 1984; Nanson and Hickin, 1983). Existing influence, and the evolution of channel plan-
kinematic models characterize bank retreat as a form. This resulted in the development of
non-linear function of channel curvature with a process-based mathematical models of river
spatial lag that takes into account downstream meandering (e.g. Ikeda et al., 1981; Johannes-
migration of meanders (Ferguson, 1984). The son and Parker, 1989; Parker and Andrews,
model of Ferguson (1984) is able to reproduce the 1986; Parker et al., 1983; Seminara and Tubino,
evolution of fundamental meander forms includ- 1989; Zolezzi and Seminara, 2001). The mathe-
ing bend asymmetry and compound looping, and matical models have two main components: one
the results are in overall agreement with the data characterizing fluid dynamic–morphodynamic
obtained from real rivers (Gilvear et al., 2000; interactions and the other characterizing bank-
Hooke, 2003). erosion process. The representation of fluid
dynamic–morphodynamic interactions is based
on fluid-mechanics principles (i.e. momentum
1 Process-based mathematical models of and mass conservation principles of the fluids).
meander morphodynamics The process-based models of meander mor-
Following the development of kinematic mod- phodynamics vary in their mathematical sophis-
els, a significant emphasis has been given on tication; they can be divided into two main
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
10 Progress in Physical Geography
groups of analytical and numerical models. To The numerical models of meander morpho-
make the solution analytically tractable, analyti- dynamics include both non-linear versions of
cal models employ simplified assumptions linear analytical models (Camporeale et al.,
regarding river morphology (i.e. steady-state 2007) and fully numerical models (Blanckaert
flow conditions and various geometric con- and De Vriend, 2003; Darby et al., 2002; Duan
straints such as invariable channel width, mild et al., 2001; Imran et al., 1999; Mosselman,
bend curvatures, and slowly varying bed topo- 1998; Nelson and Smith, 1989). Non-linear ana-
graphy). Analytical models can be linear or lytical models have been extended from their
non-linear. In linear models (Ikeda et al., corresponding linear versions using a non-
1981; Johannesson and Parker, 1989; Parker linear iterative procedure (e.g. Imran et al.,
and Andrews, 1986; Zolezzi and Seminara, 1999) to solve the sediment mass continuity
2001), the solution of the governing equations equation. On the other hand, in fully numerical
is obtained analytically through linearization. models the governing equations are not
Thus, flow non-linearities are neglected obtained analytically, rather they are solved
although they might be important in certain numerically. Numerical solution routines allow
cases (Camporeale et al., 2007; Pittaluga et al., for fewer geometric restrictions and provide a
2009). Fluid dynamic–morphodynamic compo- much better solution for 3D helicoidal flow;
nent includes two-dimensional (2D) depth- however, they are computationally very expen-
averaged flow-field equations (i.e. St Venant sive. Advances in computing technologies have
equations) for shallow flow, a sediment- started permitting detailed simulations of mean-
continuity equation (i.e. Exner equation), and der morphodynamics with the use of 2D and 3D
empirical sediment-transport formulae. Based computational fluid-dynamic (CFD) models
on these equations, the model calculates the (e.g. Duan et al., 2001; Olsen, 2003; Ruther and
flow field, bed deformation, and free-surface Olsen, 2007).
elevation along a channel at any spatial coordi- Nevertheless, the selection of the type of
nate for given hydraulic conditions and plan- model to be used in the analysis should be based
form configuration. Then it determines the on the specific characteristics of the problem.
excess flow velocity near the outer bank of a Analytical models are proven to be successful
bend (i.e. the difference between the depth- for rapid assessments of channel change and for
averaged near-bank velocity and the cross- studies on the large-space scale and long-term
sectionally averaged velocity) that occurs due to behavior of meandering rivers (Camporeale
velocity distortions resulting from the variations et al., 2005, 2007). On the other hand, numerical
in channel curvature and bed topography. Thus, models may be more useful in the analysis of
excess near-bank velocity reflects the influence short-term evolution such as in determining
of planform curvature as well as in-channel geomorphic response of a river reach to human
geometry (i.e. bankfull width, channel depth, bed modifications. The numerical models can be
morphology, and longitudinal slope), flow used to determine the migration rates more
characteristics (i.e. bankfull discharge), bed accurately at specific locations within a real
material (i.e. sediment size) and bed-form river with an irregular channel planform by
structure (Bridge, 1976, 1977, 1992; Bridge and inputting detailed information on flow, bank
Jarvis, 1976; De Vriend and Struiksma, 1984; and channel geometry, and bed- and bank-
Keller, 1972; Odgaard, 1987; Parker and Johan- material characteristics. For instance, when the
nesson, 1989; Seminara and Tubino, 1989; channel curvature is very high (i.e. bend is
Struiksma et al., 1985; Termini, 2009; Thomp- sharp) or the width-depth ratio b (¼ b/H, where
son, 1986; Whiting and Dietrich, 1993a, 1993b). b is one-half the channel width and H is flow
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Güneralp and Marston 11
depth) is very low, the analytical modeling purpose is to predict migration rates along a
scheme cannot fully characterize the flow field. channel, then, typically, bank-erosion coeffi-
In such cases, the use of numerical models may cient E0 is calibrated for historical planform
become necessary. changes. A recent study shows the potential for
defining bank erosion E0 from field measure-
ments of bank material properties, and thus the
2 Bank erosion model ability to determine E0 without calibration
The most widely used bank erosion submodel, (Constantine et al., 2009). Such a capability
on the other hand, is a semi-empirical model would allow for predicting migration rates in the
that assumes a linear relationship between cases of limited or no historical planform-data
excess near-bank velocity and bank-erosion availability or in the presence of changing flow
(i.e. migration) rate along the channel with an and bank conditions. In reality, bank-erosion
empirically derived bank-erosion (i.e. erodibil- rate strongly depends on the properties of
ity) coefficient (Ikeda et al., 1981): the bank (i.e. bank height, slope, and bank-
material composition) (e.g. Hasegawa, 1989;
ðsÞ ¼ E0 ub ðsÞ ð1Þ
Wallick et al., 2006; Wynn and Mostaghimi,
where E0 is bank-erosion coefficient, which 2006) and the channel (i.e. width and slope). It
depends on the soil-mechanical properties of the also depends on the presence of in-channel and
material along the bank (Parker and Andrews, floodplain vegetation (e.g. Micheli and Kirch-
1986); ub is the excess near-bank velocity and ner, 2002a, 2002b; Micheli et al., 2004; Wynn
is the migration rate along the channel axis and Mostaghimi, 2006), the influence of which
s. The bank erosion coefficient E0 represents the may not be easy to specify with an empirical
hydraulic or the fluvial erosion (i.e. the erosion coefficient. All of these factors may result in
of soil particles due to the shear forces exerted variability in erodibility E0 values, and thus in
on the bank by the flow velocity ub). In other migration rates. For example, recently performed
words, the rate of bank erosion depends on the physical laboratory experiments demonstrate
rate of material removal from the base of the that processes governing erosion and failure in
bank (Thorne and Lewin, 1982). In addition, riverbanks composed of coarse-grained material
the bank-erosion model assumes a bank erodibil- are significantly different than those in river-
ity which is homogeneous across the floodplain. banks composed of fine-grained material (Nardi
Although the validity of E0 has been supported et al., 2012).
by field observations (Hasegawa, 1989; Micheli Some recent models couple fluid dynamic–
and Kirchner, 2002a, 2002b; Odgaard, 1987; Piz- morphodynamic models of meandering with
zuto and Meckelnburg, 1989; Wallick et al., detailed mechanistic models of bank erosion
2006), it is important to note that it represents a (Darby et al., 2002; Duan and Julien, 2005;
bank-erosion process where the primary mechan- Duan et al., 2001; Motta et al., 2012). Mechanis-
ism is fluvial erosion, the failed blocks of mate- tic models relate the bank erosion to the physical
rial are easily eroded, and the banks are tall and processes controlling bank retreat. Thus, they
vegetation-free. avoid the need for model calibration to determine
The linear bank-erosion model has been bank-erodibility parameters. Mechanistic char-
employed in numerous studies on the long- acterization can account for bank-failure
term evolution of meandering rivers (e.g. Ikeda mechanisms (e.g. cantilever, planar, rotational,
et al., 1981; Lancaster and Bras, 2002; Parker and seepage induced failures) as well as hydrau-
and Andrews, 1986) as well as in predictive lic erosion. It also allows for better representa-
models (e.g. Larsen and Greco, 2002). If the tion of natural bank profiles. For example,
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
12 Progress in Physical Geography
using a bank-erosion model derived from the characteristics and governing failure mechan-
mass-conservation law for near-bank cells and isms of bank material, sediment removal pro-
a 2D depth-averaged meander morphodynamics cesses, etc.) (Constantine et al., 2009). The
model, Duan et al. (2001) showed that the rate model of Duan et al. (2001), for example, does
of bank erosion is a function of longitudinal not account for the geotechnical bank failure
gradient in sediment transport, the strength of of cohesive bank material following basal ero-
secondary flow, and mass wasting from bank sion. In the model of Darby et al. (2002), the
erosion. Similarly, Darby et al. (2002) replaced only failure mechanism of bank migration is
the existing bank-erosion model of a 2D depth- planar failure. Equally importantly, overall
averaged numerical model (RIPA) of flow and results obtained from these studies point out the
bed topography for single-thread rivers with importance of taking into account (1) aggrada-
irregular planform (Mosselman and Crosato, tion and degradation processes that occur along
1991) with a more mechanistic model (Osman the channel; (2) floodplain heterogeneity and
and Thorne, 1988). The modified model can variability in environmental factors; and (3) the
simulate the basal erosion of cohesive bank feedback between sediment-transport and bank-
material (mainly composed of silt and clay) and erosion processes in order to accurately charac-
subsequent bank failure as well as transport and terize bank-erosion processes of meandering
deposition of eroded bank material. In another rivers.
study, Duan and Julien (2005) followed an
approach that separates the calculation of bank IV Simulating meander
erosion and the migration of banks. The model
calculates mass wasting from bank failure using
morphodynamics with linear
a simple parallel bank-failure model for non- analytical models
cohesive bank material (mainly composed of The linear analytical models produce qualita-
sand and gravel). In a recent study, Motta tively the same behavior of their non-linear
et al. (2012) replaced the semi-empirical bank- counterparts; they have proven to be successful
erosion model of 2D depth-averaged meander- in reproducing the long-timescale planform
migration model (Abad and Garcia, 2006) with evolution of meandering rivers (Camporeale
a mechanistic bank-erosion model developed et al., 2005, 2007). A range of linear models
based on the CONCEPTS (CONservational with various orders, from first to fourth order,
Channel Evolution and Pollutant Transport Sys- have been developed. Model order reflects the
tem) model (Langendoen and Alonso, 2008; number of curvature-related convolution terms
Langendoen and Simon, 2008). This mechanis- in the model that depends on the sophistication
tic model relates bank erosion to hydraulic ero- of the mathematical representation of the inter-
sion and mass failure and accounts for natural actions between excess near-bank flow and
bank profile and multiple parallel layers of soil planform curvature (Camporeale et al., 2007;
in the vertical profile with different erodibility Seminara et al., 2001; Zolezzi and Seminara,
or shear-strength characteristics. 2001). Regardless of the degree of sophistica-
In spite of their advantages, the mechanistic tion in the fluid dynamic–morphodynamic com-
bank-erosion models are rather specific to the ponent, nearly always, these models employ the
bank material type. Thus, they are not as widely semi-empirical linear model of bank erosion
applicable as the semi-empirical model (i.e. constant bank-erosion coefficient, equa-
(equation 1), which can represent the overall tion 1). In addition, notably important is that these
bank-erosion behavior resulting from the com- models are deterministic (i.e. the model produces
bination of various factors (e.g. bank erodibility the same output from a given set of initial
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Güneralp and Marston 13
conditions or initial state; in other words, no acceleration and I is the valley slope. The effect
randomness is involved in the evolution of the of secondary circulation on sediment transport
meandering-river system). and the coupling between flow field and bed
In their pioneering analytical model, Ikeda topography has been taken into account through
et al. (1981) showed that meandering occurs a theoretical relationship (Engelund, 1974),
ðnÞ 0 0
as a result of an inherent instability between h0 ¼ A C, where A is the scour factor, (n)
river flow and a mobile channel boundary due is the bed topography elevation relative to any
to the asymmetries induced by channel curva- constant level, and n is the transverse coordinate
ture. According to this theory, both bar and bend (normal to the streamwise axis). The convolu-
instabilities that result from the infinitesimal tion integral characterizes a morphodynamic
curvature-induced perturbations of the flow influence on the local migration rate that decays
field and bed topography are sufficient for the exponentially in the upstream direction (Fur-
development of meanders (Ikeda et al., 1981; bish, 1991; Güneralp and Rhoads, 2009b).
Parker et al., 1982). The model of Ikeda et al. In spite of its simplicity, the model of Ikeda
(1981) is a first-order model represented by a et al. (1981) suitably reproduces the fundamen-
single, ordinary-differential equation (ODE) tal characteristics of freely meandering rivers
characterizing the fluid dynamic–morphody- including fattening and upstream skewness of
namic process: meander bends (e.g. Kinoshita curves, Figure 4)
du dC supporting the basic validity of the form of the
þ 21 u ¼ 1 A0 C ð2Þ convolution integral. This success resulted in
ds ds
widespread use of the model in studies of
where u is streamwise velocity; C is the curva- long-term dynamics of meandering rivers,
ture along the streamwise axis s; 1 ¼ bCf including the numerical investigations of flood-
where b is the width-depth ratio defined as plain sedimentation, the influence of sedimentary
¼ b=H (where b is one-half the channel width and geological constraints on meander migration
and H is flow depth) and Cf is the friction coef- (Howard, 1992, 1996; Sun et al., 1996, 2001a,
ficient; A0 is the scour factor. In equation 2, Cf is 2001b), cutoff processes (Camporeale et al.,
characterized with no spatial variation. The 2008; Howard, 1984; Stølum, 1996; Sun et al.,
solution of equation 2 is in the form of a single 1996) (Figure 6; Figure 1.4 of Howard 1992),
convolution integral, which links the excess and the influence of meandering on riparian-
near-bank velocity to the planform curvature vegetation establishment (Perucca et al.,
(Ikeda et al., 1981; Sun et al., 1996): 2006). It was also used in environmental appli-
UbCf 2 cations such as river restoration (Abad and
ub ðsÞ ¼ bUC þ ½F þ A0 þ 2 Garcia, 2006) and by the oil and gas industry
H
ð
1
ð3Þ in the investigations of hydrocarbon reservoirs
2Cf
0
e H ðs Þ Cðs s0 Þds0 within sedimentary deposits of meandering-
river floodplains (Henriquez et al., 1990;
0
Swanson, 1993). Despite its widespread
where ub(s) is excess near-bank velocity along implementation, before cutoffs occur, the
the streamwise axis s, which promotes cutbank first-order model fails to reproduce complex
erosion; b, U, H, and F are, respectively, one- meander forms such as downstream-skewed
half the channel width, the depth-averaged meanders and compound loops or multilobed
streamwise velocity, mean velocity, average meanders and the irregular planform patterns.
depth, and the Froude number; Cf is the friction Therefore, the emergence of complex mean-
factor defined as gHI/U2; g is the gravitational ders and planform irregularity is attributed to
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
14 Progress in Physical Geography
Figure 6. Long-term evolution of a simulated meandering river, and its associated sediment size distribution
on the surface of the floodplain for characteristic parameters of 2b/H ¼ 20 and I ¼ 0.00067, where b is half
channel width, H is the average flow depth, and I is the valley slope. The channel is represented by green
curve; the clay plugs are represented by yellow curves. Sediment size ranges from 4.78 mm (red) to 10.58
(blue). Source: Sun et al. (2001b). Reproduced with permission from Water Resources Research.
the influence of high-frequency variations in bars and point bars can inhibit the growth of
channel curvature resulting from cutoff pro- alternate bars (Tubino and Seminara, 1990).
cesses (Figure 1 versus Figure 4A) (Camporeale Among high-order models, second-order
and Ridolfi, 2007; Güneralp and Rhoads, models assume that alternate bars do not have
2009b; Seminara et al., 2001). However, the a systematic effect on average bank-erosion
emergence of complex meanders is commonly rates (Johannesson and Parker, 1989). The main
observed in rivers in nature before the occur- reason behind this assumption is that, in most
rence of cutoffs (Hooke, 1984, 2007a, 2007b). cases, the wavelength of meanders and that of
Following the first-order model of Ikeda et al. alternate bars are not the same.
(1981), higher-order (i.e. second- to fourth- If the wavelength of alternate bars is the same
order) models have been developed (Johannes- as the wavelength of the meanders, a ‘resonance
son and Parker, 1989; Zolezzi and Seminara, condition’ can occur. In their theoretical work,
2001). These models incorporate additional Zolezzi and Seminara (2001) and Seminara
details of flow–sediment transport–bed mor- et al. (2001) demonstrated the resonance condi-
phology interactions reflected in the increased tion by examining the influence of the interac-
sophistication of differential equations. In fact, tions between the planform morphology and
they consider the presence of alternate bars (also the large-scale variations in bed topography on
known as free bars) and their influence on meander migration. For this purpose, they
the morphodynamic processes (Ikeda, 1989; developed a fourth-order analytical model of
Tubino and Seminara, 1990; Whiting and meander morphodynamics (Zolezzi and
Dietrich, 1993a, 1993b). Alternate bars are Seminara, 2001: equation 5.15):
induced by bottom flow instability and migrate
along the channel. They are highly common in d 4 um d 3 um d 2 um dum
many meandering rivers, especially in those 4 4
þ 3 3
þ 2 2
þ 1
ds ds ds ds
with low or high sinuosity (Seminara and ð4Þ
X 6
dCj
Tubino, 1989). On the other hand, point bars, þ 0 um ¼ Am jþ1 j
also called forced bars, which are produced by j¼0
ds
curvature-driven secondary flows, are station-
ary. In meandering rivers with intermediate where C is the curvature ofP
1the channel axis s;
sinuosity, the interactions between alternate streamwise velocity u ¼ um sinðMnÞ with
m¼0
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Güneralp and Marston 15
M ¼ (2mþ1) /2; um is the mth Fourier mode and fourth-order model (equation 4) allows the
Am ¼ 8(-1)m[(2mþ1) ]2 where m = 0, 1, 2, . . . . influence of high-frequency variations in plan-
All the other parameters and the solution of the form curvature to be taken into account (Zolezzi
equation are given in detail in Zolezzi and Semi- et al., 2009). In fact, the solution of the fourth-
nara (2001). order model yields several convolution integrals
Based on the solution of their model, they linking excess near-bank velocity not only to
showed that resonance occurs for a threshold local and upstream curvature, but also to down-
value (bR) which characterizes force-free spatial stream curvature (Camporeale et al., 2007;
modes of the river system consisting of migrat- Zolezzi and Seminara, 2001). In addition, the
ing alternate bars. At this threshold value, the spatial-weighting distributions characterizing
alternate bars can neither grow nor decay in these convolution integrals present a morphody-
time or in space. In other words, they do not namic influence on migration rates that is much
have a morphodynamic influence on the migra- more complicated than simple exponential decay
tion behavior. On the other hand, the conditions (Camporeale et al., 2007; Zolezzi and Seminara,
where b value is lower or higher than bR are 2001) yielded from the first-order model. The
defined, respectively, as sub- and super-reso- model of Zolezzi and Seminara (2001) also
nant conditions. In channels characterized by shows that the spatial extent (i.e. decay rate or
the sub-resonant condition (b < bR), the migra- spatial memory) of the morphodynamic influ-
tion rate is influenced by upstream planform ence depends on the value of the width-depth
morphology, whereas for those characterized ratio b and typically displays spatial oscillations
by the super-resonant condition (b > bR), it is on a scale of the order of meander wavelength.
influenced by downstream planform morphol- Notably important, however, is that, similar to
ogy. In contrast to the model of Ikeda et al. the first-order models, high-order models also
(1981) which can only simulate upstream- assume a constant bank erodibility which implies
skewed meanders – a case similar to that which homogeneous floodplain conditions.
occurs in the sub-resonant condition – the
Zolezzi and Seminara (2001) model can suc- V Empirical evidence for the linear
cessfully simulate the evolution of meanders
from simple bends to compound loops or multi-
analytical models and further
lobed meanders in pre-cutoff timescales. Under insights on process–form linkages
sub-resonant conditions, the morphodynamic Although significant attention has been given to
influence is in the downstream direction, con- the mathematical models of meander migration,
tributing to downstream migration and the qualitative or visual comparisons of mean-
upstream skewness of meanders (Figure 1). der forms and planform patterns simulated by
On the other hand, under super-resonant condi- the models to those in nature have been viewed
tions, it is in the upstream direction, causing as adequate to judge the validity of process
upstream migration, and thus the development characterization. To date only few studies have
of downstream-skewed meanders. Temporal rigorously and quantitatively evaluated the
shift from upstream- to downstream-skewed validity of the meander morphodynamics
meanders may also be possible under super- obtained from the solutions of these models
resonant conditions. Moreover, super- using real river data (Furbish, 1991; Güneralp
resonance combined with sub-resonance can and Rhoads, 2009b, 2010). In an early study
lead to the development of compound loops. on the evaluation of the linear models, Furbish
The detailed characterization of fluid- (1991) examined the influence of upstream
dynamic and morphodynamic processes in the planform curvature on local migration rates of
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
16 Progress in Physical Geography
the Beatton River in British Columbia, Canada influence. In contrast, the emergence of com-
(Hickin, 1974; Hickin and Nanson, 1975) to pound loops or multilobed meanders can only
determine whether an empirically obtained plan- be described by a damped-oscillatory mode
form curvature–migration relation conforms to a (i.e. exponential decay superimposed on oscilla-
pure exponential-decay form of upstream curva- tions). Remarkably, empirically derived expo-
ture effect yielded by the first-order model. The nential decay mode corresponds to the
study concluded that the model can adequately planform influence yielded by the first-order
capture the morphodynamics of the compound models of meander morphodynamics (Ikeda
loops. et al., 1981). On the other hand, the damped-
Recent empirical work examined further in oscillatory mode is associated with the solution
detail the influence of planform morphology of higher-order models that can simulate the
on the development of different meander emergence of compound loops (Camporeale
forms including simple bends and multilobed et al., 2007; Zolezzi and Seminara, 2001). These
meanders in several freely meandering rivers findings imply that the morphodynamic influ-
(Güneralp, 2007; Güneralp and Rhoads, ence characterized by damped-oscillatory mode
2009b, 2010). The framework for this study was acts like a high-pass filter that is much more sen-
to view an active meandering river as a linear sitive to high-frequency variations in planform
dynamical system (Franklin et al., 2002) where morphology than pure exponential-decay struc-
a mapping function (i.e. spatial relation) charac- ture yielded by the first-order model. The
terizes the influence of the system input (i.e. the damped-oscillatory mode reflects the changing
morphodynamic influence in the form of cumu- influence of evolving-bed morphology (e.g. the
lative planform curvature) on its output (i.e. the formation of multiple point bars) on planform
local migration rate ). The spatial relations evolution as the channel evolves from simple
were empirically determined using Discrete bends to complex meanders (Güneralp and
Signal Processing techniques (Franklin et al., Rhoads, 2009b, 2010). All of these findings
2002; Kamen and Heck, 1997). The findings provide empirical support for the high-order
of the study show that planform geometry mathematical models characterizing the feed-
strongly influences meander morphodynamics. backs between fluid-dynamic and morphody-
The influence of planform curvature on mean- namic processes governing the dynamics of
der migration has multiple behavior modes, river meandering. A recent experimental study
characterized by exponential decay and oscilla- on a high-amplitude meander bend in a flume has
tory patterns. In other words, the morphody- revealed that changing water-surface slope
namic influence is characterized by multiple induced by the channel curvature causes the
curvature-related convolution terms. Moreover, development of damped-oscillatory flow-
the relative importance of different behavior velocity variations and bed deformations along
modes, and thus the spatial weighting distribu- the bend, which may result in the development
tion of planform-curvature influence, changes, of multiple bar forms and pools (Termini, 2009).
depending on the initial planform morphology Multiple point bars and pools along a meander
of the migrating channel (Güneralp and Rhoads, bend may then be attributed to the river’s morpho-
2009b). logical response to the changing channel curvature
Güneralp and Rhoads (2009b) also demon- (De Vriend and Struiksma, 1984; Parker and
strated that the evolution of simple bends includ- Johannesson, 1989; Struiksma et al., 1985) that
ing Kinoshita curves (Kinoshita, 1961) can creates flow instability along the meander bend.
adequately be characterized by the exponential- Changing spatial structure of the morphodyna-
decay mode of downstream morphodynamic mic influence on migration rates with increasing
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Güneralp and Marston 17
Figure 7. A reach of Rio Jutaı́, Brazil, representing an irregular planform pattern composed of highly elon-
gated, irregular, and multilobed meander bends. Flow direction is from left to right (4 48’29.72’’S,
68 31’44.74’’W).
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
18 Progress in Physical Geography
Figure 8. Examples of heterogeneous floodplains composed of erodibility patch mosaics. Patch size ranges
as a function of l along valley (left-right) axis and of A along cross-valley (up-down) axis, where l and A are,
respectively, the linear wavelength and the bend amplitude of initial meander bends used in the simulations.
Hot (cold) colors represent high (low) erodibility. The mosaics of patches represent the spatial arrangements
of environmental factors that influence migration and that vary with spatial scale, including patches of vegeta-
tion (e.g. forested versus non-forested areas, low versus high biomass density), floodplain sedimentological
complexity (e.g. clay plugs versus sandy alluvium), and human activities (e.g. cropland versus managed forest).
landscapes have typically been seen as separate that a spatially uncorrelated stochastic variabil-
entities although the interactions between them ity in soil erodibility can contribute to the devel-
play a significant role in biomorphodynamic opment of irregularities in meander planform.
evolution of riverine landscapes as well as in In a recent study, Güneralp and Rhoads
riverine-ecosystem dynamics (Van De Wiel (2011) have systematically examined and quan-
et al., 2007; Ward et al., 2002). Moreover, the tified the dependence of meander morphody-
role of spatial and temporal variability in the namics on the spatial scale of heterogeneity
environmental conditions on the biophysical (i.e. patch size), the magnitude of variability,
feedbacks between meander morphodynamics and the stochasticity in floodplain erodibility.
and floodplain patterns and processes remains For this purpose, the study used a first-order
to be identified. model of river meandering (Ikeda et al., 1981)
Past numerical work based on the process- and stochastically simulated, heterogeneous
based mathematical models of meandering floodplains composed of patches of differential
examined the influence of spatial variability in erodibility with different scales of patchiness.
sedimentary processes and geological condi- Patch size in the valley direction ranged from
tions, such as erodible point bar deposits versus 2 to /16 and in the cross-valley direction from
resistant clay plugs and valley walls (Howard, 4A to A/4, where and A are, respectively, the
1996; Sun et al., 1996) and vegetation density linear wavelength and bend amplitude of initial
and patterns (Perucca et al., 2007), on the mean- meander bends used in the simulations. The
der migration patterns. These studies showed patch mosaics of erodibility reflect the spatial
that meandering processes are highly influenced arrangements of environmental factors influen-
by spatial and temporal variability in the flood- cing the magnitude and scale of variability such
plain soil erodibility. Similarly, through a pre- as vegetation, soil properties, topography, and
liminary analysis, Sun et al. (1996) suggested human activities (Figure 8). The findings of the
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Güneralp and Marston 19
Figure 9. Influence of patch size of differential erodibility (e.g. Figure 8) on planform evolution. Red and blue
arrows represent the direction of increasing maximum cross-valley extent of the meander belt and increasing
variability in bend amplitude, respectively. The area marked by the dashed line identifies the patch structures
resulting in highly complex meander morphologies including upstream- or downstream-skewed, irregular,
elongated bends, and compound loops or multilobed meanders. It also corresponds to the patch sizes for
which the occurrence of cutoffs in shorter timescales is more common than that for the other patch sizes.
Source: Modified from Güneralp and Rhoads (2011). Reproduced with permission from Geophysical Research
Letters.
study show that meanders simulated with het- and compound loops develop (e.g. l/4, A). The
erogeneous landscapes evolve into complex smallest patch size or the highest heterogeneity
morphologies with remarkable similarities to (i.e. l/16, A/4) results in the lowest variability in
those of freely meandering rivers (Figure 9) as bend amplitudes although meander bends have
opposed to highly regular meanders simulated morphologies still much more complicated than
with homogeneous floodplains (Figure 4A). those for homogeneous floodplain. This con-
The patch size substantially influences the firms the strong influence of small, high-fre-
spatial characteristics (e.g. shape and size) of quency variations in planform curvature on
meander bends. Specifically, meander bends morphodynamic evolution of meanders (Cam-
simulated with floodplains composed of patches poreale et al., 2007; Güneralp, 2007; Güneralp
larger than the initial size of the meanders (e.g. and Rhoads, 2009b, 2010; Zolezzi and Semi-
2l, 4A) are highly elongated and upstream- nara, 2001). Moreover, the sensitivity of auto-
skewed resembling distorted forms of Kinoshita genic meandering processes to stochastic
curves (Kinoshita, 1961), whereas other bends variability in the environment leads to different
are compressed, leading to an irregular plan- patterns of meander evolution even in land-
form pattern with high variability in bend scapes with the same patch sizes and magni-
amplitudes and cross-valley extent (Figure 9). tudes of erosional variability (Güneralp and
As the patch size along the valley axis decreases Rhoads, 2011). In summary, Güneralp and
for large patch sizes along the cross-valley axis Rhoads (2011) show the strong influence of
(e.g. l/16, 4A), elongated compound loops floodplain heterogeneity in the morphodynamic
develop. On the other hand, as cross-valley het- evolution of meandering rivers.
erogeneity increases, the maximum cross-valley In another recent study, Parker et al. (2011)
extent of the meander belt decreases (e.g. 2l, A/4) have introduced a new framework for the
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
20 Progress in Physical Geography
modeling of meander migration, called the along the cutbank and the deposition of the sedi-
‘moving-boundary framework’, in order to ment on the point bar (Gurnell et al., 2006; Mas-
address the limitations of the analytical models terman and Thorne, 1992).
related to bank-erosion and bank-deposition The variability in soil properties (i.e. soil type
processes. According to this framework, the and sedimentary structure resulting from ero-
bank-erosion process, which is characterized sion, deposition, and hydrological processes)
in the analytical models as a linear relation and floodplain topography and the land change
between excess near-bank velocity – a simple due to human activities influence the spatial pat-
aspect of fluid dynamics – and migration rate, terns of vegetation succession in riparian zones
is not completely satisfactory. The framework (Nanson and Beach, 1977). Newly formed point
also addresses another simplified assumption bars by channel migration serve as possible sites
that the migration due to the deposition on the for vegetation establishment (Everitt, 1968;
inner bank of a meander is equal to the migra- McKenney et al., 1995), whereas eroded cut-
tion due to the erosion on the opposite bank, banks remove the vegetation cover. Cutoff
leading to a constant bankfull width as the chan- channels such as oxbow lakes also significantly
nel migrates. By incorporating the role of contribute to the complex mosaics of morpholo-
slumping at the eroding banks and of vegetation gical and ecological habitats of floodplain land-
both in erosion and deposition processes, the scapes. Oxbow lakes increase the subsurface
new framework attempts to replace the current hydrologic connectivity between the river and
assumptions and provide a more physically floodplain (Amoros and Bornette, 2002) and
based explanation of channel migration. Such provide suitable environment for the coloniza-
an approach would allow for considering the tion of certain vegetation species (Stella et al.,
dynamic interaction between erosion and 2011). Segregated and complicated sedimentary
deposition processes in determining the mor- patterns of floodplain landscapes created by
phodynamic evolution of meandering rivers. meander morphodynamics also control the tex-
There has been an increasing emphasis on ture of floodplain soils, which in turn influences
advancing the understanding of integrated the soil moisture balance (Rodriguez-Iturbe and
dynamics of river meandering with landscape Porporato, 2005; Rodriguez-Iturbe et al., 1999)
dynamics, particularly with riparian-vegetation and the establishment of riparian vegetation
dynamics (Greco and Plant, 2003; Marston (Nanson and Beach, 1977; Piégay et al., 2000;
et al., 2005; Perucca et al., 2006, 2007). The Robertson and Augspurger, 1999). Moreover,
interactions between meandering rivers and subtle topographic variations in the floodplain
their surrounding riparian vegetation involve can affect the connectivity of surface waters
both hydraulic and ecological processes (Jones et al., 2008; Poole, 2002) and thus flu-
(Hughes et al., 2005; Hupp and Osterkamp, vial, hydrologic, and ecological processes.
1996). The hydrological, hydraulic, and geo- Environmental heterogeneity and stochastic
morphological characteristics of a meandering variability of floodplain landscapes, in turn, influ-
river and environmental conditions of its flood- ence the morphodynamics of meandering rivers
plain control the availability of water, sedi- by creating non-uniform bank erodibility as well
ments, nutrients, and seeds for the riparian as sediment deposition patterns on the point bars
environment (Bendix and Hupp, 2000; Malan- and surrounding floodplain (Constantine et al.,
son, 1993; Salo et al., 1986). On the other hand, 2009; Hudson and Kesel, 2000; Wynn and
vegetation biomass density and patterns affect Mostaghimi, 2006).
the river channel by changing its flow field and Recent numerical work (Camporeale and
morphology through its effect on the erosion Ridolfi, 2010; Van De Wiel and Darby, 2004;
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Güneralp and Marston 21
Perucca et al., 2006, 2007), also supported by (Hooke, 1995; Lawler, 1993; Piégay et al.,
field observations (Meitzen, 2009; Nanson and 2005). Due to the rapid increase in demand for
Beach, 1977; Robertson, 2001, 2006), has high- freshwater and land, humans have been modify-
lighted the role of meander dynamics in the ing meandering rivers and their floodplains both
development of vegetation patterns observed directly (e.g. dams, diversions, channelization,
in riparian landscapes as well as the importance bank protection, and mining) and indirectly
of vegetation-succession processes on the plan- (e.g. by changing the sediment load and flow
form evolution of river meanders. In particular, regime through urbanization, agriculture, defor-
this work emphasized that variability in bank estation, and mining). Such changes in environ-
erodibility induced by vegetation patterns and mental conditions can influence the inherently
density may yield different meander shapes intricate meander morphodynamics and may
from the usual upstream-skewed ones generated result in complicated migration responses to
by the morphodynamic models for sub-resonant these changes. In many cases, this complexity
rivers. These findings provide the first numeri- makes it difficult to perform a long-term predic-
cal evidence for the feedbacks between meander tion of the future states of morphologies in
morphodynamics and floodplain-vegetation meandering rivers in nature.
dynamics. The floodplain landscapes of freely There is a critical need for more viable solu-
meandering rivers, however, are still much tions to the problems created by bank erosion
more heterogeneous than their simulated coun- and channel migration (Brookes and Shields,
terparts. Identifying the biophysical feedbacks 1996; Kondolf, 2006; Larsen and Greco,
between the morphodynamics of meandering 2002). This need calls for a comprehensive and
and floodplain patterns and processes and the predictive understanding of both process–form
influence of spatial and temporal variability feedbacks in meander morphodynamics –
in the environmental conditions on these particularly the feedbacks governing the inte-
feedbacks is critical for process-based under- grated dynamics of river meandering and their
standing of the evolution of meandering river– floodplain landscapes – and the influence of envi-
floodplain systems and the response of such ronmental variability on these feedbacks. Driven
coupled systems to changes in environmental by such a need, there have been exciting develop-
conditions such as the hydrological regime or ments in river-meandering research; however, to
land use/land cover (Güneralp et al., 2012). date, most research efforts have focused mainly
on either theoretical and numerical modeling or
VII Concluding remarks field-based studies, or laboratory experiments
(Güneralp et al., 2012; Hooke et al., 2011). The
Changes in meandering river channels reflect
importance of bridging the theoretical modeling
the adjustments of these rivers to their intrinsic
and real world complexity has been recognized
dynamics as well as to variability in environ-
since the first symposium on river meandering
mental conditions such as soil and geological
in 1983 (Elliot, 1984). Shen (1984) highlighted
characteristics of the floodplain, vegetation pat-
this issue in his keynote for the session ‘Present
terns and processes, land use, hydrologic
Knowledge and Future Directions’:
regime, tectonic activity, and climate. Where
human activity encroaches on meandering riv- It is extremely difficult to develop theoretical mod-
ers, the morphodynamics of meandering rivers els to describe the occurrence of meandering and the
are often viewed as a sign of river instability and flow characteristics in stream bends because these
raise societal concerns due to the hazards asso- models will ultimately provide us with long-term
ciated with bank erosion and channel change solutions. However, on the other hand, researchers
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
22 Progress in Physical Geography
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Güneralp and Marston 23
River, Nebraska Sand Hills. Sedimentology 33: Dietrich WE and Smith JD (1983) Influence of the point-
851–870. bar on flow through curved channels. Water Resources
Brookes A and Shields FDJ (1996) River Channel Research 19: 1173–1192.
Restoration: Guiding Principles for Sustainable Proj- Dietrich WE and Smith JD (1984a) Bed load transport in
ects. Chichester: Wiley. a river meander. Water Resources Research 20:
Callander RA (1978) River meandering. Annual Review of 1355–1380.
Fluid Mechanics 10: 129–158. Dietrich WE and Smith JD (1984b) Processes controlling
Camporeale C and Ridolfi L (2007) Noise-induced phe- the equilibrium bed morphology. In: Elliot CM (ed.)
nomena in riparian vegetation dynamics. Geophysical River Meandering: Proceedings of the Conference
Research Letters 34: L18406. Rivers ’83, New Orleans. New York: American Society
Camporeale C and Ridolfi L (2010) Interplay among river of Civil Engineers, 759–769.
meandering, discharge stochasticity and riparian Dietrich WE, Smith JD, and Dunne T (1979) Flow and
vegetation. Journal of Hydrology 382: 138–144. sediment transport in a sand bedded meander. Journal
Camporeale C, Perona P, Porporato A, and Ridolfi L of Geology 87: 305–315.
(2005) On the long-term behavior of meandering rivers. Dietrich WE, Smith JD, and Dunne T (1984) Boundary
Water Resources Research 41: 1–13. shear stress, sediment transport and bed morphology
Camporeale C, Perona P, Porporato A, and Ridolfi L in a sand-bedded river meander during high and
(2007) Hierarchy of models for meandering rivers and low flow. In: Elliot CM (ed.) River Meandering:
related morphodynamic processes. Reviews of Geo- Proceedings of the Conference Rivers ’83, New
physics 45: RG1001. Orleans. New York: American Society of Civil
Camporeale C, Perucca E, and Ridolfi L (2008) Sig- Engineers, 632–639.
nificance of cutoff in meandering river dynamics. Duan JG and Julien PY (2005) Numerical simulation of the
Journal of Geophysical Research 113: F01001. inception of channel meandering. Earth Surface Pro-
Chitale SV (1970) River channel patterns. Journal of the cesses and Landforms 30: 1093–1110.
Hydraulics Division, ASCE 96(HY1): 201–221. Duan JG, Wang SSY, and Jia YF (2001) The applications
Chitale SV (1973) Theories and relationships of of the enhanced CCHE2D model to study the alluvial
river channel patterns. Journal of Hydrology 19: channel migration processes. Journal of Hydraulic
285–308. Research 39: 469–480.
Constantine JA and Dunne T (2008) Meander cutoff and Einstein HA and Shen HW (1964) Study on meandering in
the controls on the production of oxbow lakes. Geology straight alluvial channels. Journal of Geophysical
36: 23–26. Research 69(24): 5239–5247.
Constantine CR, Dunne T, and Hanson GJ (2009) Exam- Elliot CM (ed.) (1984) River Meandering: Proceedings of
ining the physical meaning of the bank erosion coef- the Conference Rivers ’83, New Orleans. New York:
ficient used in meander migration modeling. American Society of Civil Engineers.
Geomorphology 106: 242–252. Engelund F (1974) Flow and bed topography in channel
Constantine JA, McLean SR, and Dunne T (2010) A bends. Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE
mechanism of chute cutoff along large meandering 100(HY11): 1631–48.
rivers with uniform floodplain topography. Geological Erskine W, McFadden C, and Bishop P (1992) Alluvial
Society of America Bulletin 122: 855–869. cutoffs as indicators of former channel conditions.
Darby SE, Alabyan AM, and Van De Wiel MJ (2002) Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 17: 23–37.
Numerical simulation of bank erosion and channel Everitt BL (1968) Use of the cottonwood in an investiga-
migration in meandering rivers. Water Resources tion of the recent history of a floodplain. American
Research 38(9): 1163. Journal of Science 266: 417–439.
De Vriend HJ and Struiksma N (1984) Flow and bed Fares YR (2000) Changes of bed topography in mean-
deformation in river bends. In: Elliot CM (ed.) River dering rivers at a neck cutoff intersection. Journal of
Meandering: Proceedings of the Conference Rivers ’83, Environmental Hydrology 8: Paper 13.
New Orleans. New York: American Society of Civil Ferguson RI (1973) Regular meander path models. Water
Engineers, 810–828. Resources Research 9: 1079–1086.
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
24 Progress in Physical Geography
Ferguson RI (1976) Disturbed periodic model for river development: Luangwa River, Zambia. Earth Surface
meanders. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 1: Processes and Landforms 25: 421–436.
337–347. Girvetz EH and Greco SE (2007) How to define a patch: A
Ferguson RI (1984) Kinematic model of meander migra- spatial model for hierarchically delineating organism-
tion. In: Elliot CM (ed.) River Meandering: Proceed- specific habitat patches. Landscape Ecology 22:
ings of the Conference Rivers ’83, New Orleans. New 1131–1142.
York: American Society of Civil Engineers, 942–951. Greco SE and Plant RE (2003) Temporal mapping of
Franklin GF, Powell JD, and Emami-Naeini A (2002) riparian landscape change on the Sacramento River,
Feedback Control of Dynamical Systems. Upper Saddle miles 196–218, California, USA. Landscape Research
River, NJ: Prentice Hall. 28: 405–426.
Frascati A and Lanzoni S (2008) Long-term behaviour of Greco SE, Girvetz EH, Larsen EW, et al. (2008) Relative
meandering rivers. In: Dohmen Janssen CM and elevation topographic surface modelling of a large
Hulscher S (eds) RCEM 2007, Proceedings of the 5th alluvial river floodplain and applications for the study
IAHR Symposium on River, Coastal and Estuarine and management of riparian landscapes. Landscape
Morphodynamics, Enschede, 17–21 September 2007. Research 33: 461–486.
London: Taylor and Francis, 839–846. Güneralp I_ (2007) Curvature–migration relations and
Frascati A and Lanzoni S (2009) Morphodynamic regime planform dynamics of meandering rivers. PhD thesis,
and long-term evolution of meandering rivers. Jour- University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign.
nal of Geophysical Research – Earth Surface 114: Güneralp I_ and Rhoads BL (2009a) Planform change and
F02002. stream power in the Kishwaukee River watershed,
Frascati A and Lanzoni S (2010) Long-term river meander- Illinois: Geomorphic assessment for environmental
ing as a part of chaotic dynamics? A contribution from management. In: James LA, Rathburn SL, and Whit-
mathematical modeling. Earth Surface Processes and tecar GR (eds) Management and Restoration of Fluvial
Landforms 35: 791–802. Systems with Broad Historical Changes and Human
Frothingham KM and Rhoads BL (2003) Three- Impacts, Boulder, CO: Geological Society of America,
dimensional flow structure and channel change in an 109–118.
asymmetrical compound meander loop, Embarras Güneralp I_ and Rhoads BL (2009b) Empirical analysis
River, Illinois. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms of the planform curvature-migration relation of
28: 625–644. meandering rivers. Water Resourses Researh 45:
Furbish DJ (1991) Spatial autoregressive structure in W09424.
meander evolution. Geological Society of America Güneralp I_ and Rhoads BL (2010) Spatial autoregressive
Bulletin 103: 1576–1589. structure of meander evolution revisited. Geomor-
Gagliano SM and Howard PC (1984) The neck cutoff phology 120: 91–106.
oxbow lake cycle along the lower Mississippi River. In: Güneralp I_ and Rhoads BL (2011) Influence of floodplain
Elliot CM (ed.) River Meandering: Proceedings of the erosional heterogeneity on planform complexity of
Conference Rivers ’83, New Orleans. New York: meandering rivers. Geophysical Research Letters 38:
American Society of Civil Engineers, 147–158. L14401.
Gautier E, Brunstein D, Vauchel P, et al. (2010) Channel Güneralp I,_ Abad JD, Zolezzi G, and Hooke J (2012)
and floodplain sediment dynamics in a reach of the Meandering channels: Advances and challenges in
tropical meandering Rio Beni (Bolivian Amazonia). research. Geomorphology 163–164: 1–9.
Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 35: Gurnell AM, Morrissey IP, Boitsidis AJ, et al. (2006)
1838–1853. Initial adjustments within a new river channel: Inter-
Gay GR, Gay HH, Gay WH, et al. (1998) Evolution of actions between fluvial processes, colonizing vegeta-
cutoffs across meander necks in Powder River, Mon- tion, and bank profile development. Environmental
tana, USA. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 23: Management 38: 580–596.
651–662. Hasegawa K (1989) Universal bank erosion coefficient for
Gilvear D, Winterbottom S, and Sichingabula H (2000) meandering rivers. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,
Character of channel planform change and meander ASCE 115: 744–765.
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Güneralp and Marston 25
Henriquez A, Tyler KJ, and Hurst A (1990) Character- Howard AD (1984) Simulation model of meandering.
ization of fluvial sedimentology for reservoir simula- In: Elliot CM (ed.) River Meandering: Proceedings
tion modeling. Society of Petroleum Engineers of the Conference Rivers ’83. New Orleans. New
Formation Evaluation 5(3): 211–216. York: American Society of Civil Engineers,
Hickin EJ (1974) Development of meanders in natural river- 952–963.
channels. American Journal of Science 274: 414–442. Howard AD (1992) Modelling channel migration and
Hickin EJ and Nanson GC (1975) Character of channel floodplain sedimentation in meandering streams. In:
migration on Beatton River, northeast British Colum- Carling PA and Petts GE (eds) Lowland Floodplain
bia, Canada. Geological Society of America Bulletin River, Geomorphic Perspectives. New York: Wiley,
86: 487–494. 1–41.
Hickin EJ and Nanson GC (1984) Lateral migration rates Howard AD (1996) Modelling channel evolution and
of river bends. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, floodplain morphology. In: Anderson MG, Walling
ASCE 110: 1557–1567. DE, and Bates PD (eds) Floodplain Processes.
Hooke JM (1984) Changes in river meanders: A review of Chichester: Wiley, 15–62.
techniques and results of analyses. Progress in Physical Howard AD and Hemberger AT (1991) Multivariate
Geography 8: 473–508. characterization of meandering. Geomorphology 4:
Hooke JM (1995) River channel adjustment to meander 161–186.
cutoffs on the River Bollin and River Dane, northwest Howard AD and Knutson TR (1984) Sufficient conditions
England. Geomorphology 14: 235–253. for river meandering: A simulation approach. Water
Hooke JM (2003) River meander behaviour and instabil- Resources Research 20: 1659–1667.
ity: A framework for analysis. Transactions of the Hudson PF and Kesel RH (2000) Channel migration and
Institute of British Geographers 28: 238–253. meander-bend curvature in the lower Mississippi River
Hooke JM (2004) Cutoffs galore!: Occurrence and causes prior to major human modification. Geology 28:
of multiple cutoffs on a meandering river. Geomor- 531–534.
phology 61: 225–238. Hughes FMR, Colston A, and Mountford JO (2005)
Hooke JM (2007a) Complexity, self-organization, and var- Restoring riparian ecosystems: The challenge of
iation in behaviour in meandering rivers. Geomorphol- accommodating variability and designing restoration
ogy 91: 236–258. trajectories. Ecology and Society 10(1): 12.
Hooke JM (2007b) Spatial variability, mechanisms and Hupp CR and Osterkamp WR (1996) Riparian vegetation
propagation of change in an active meandering river. and fluvial geomorphic processes. Geomorphology 14:
Geomorphology 84: 277–296. 277–295.
Hooke JM and Harvey AM (1983) Meander changes in Ikeda S (1989) Sediment transport and sorting in bends. In:
relation to bend morphology and secondary flows Ikeda S and Parker G (eds) River Meandering, Water
(River Dane, Cheshire). In: Collinson JD and Lewin J Resources Monograph 12. Washington, DC: American
(eds) Modern and Ancient Fluvial Systems. Interna- Geophysical Union, 103–126.
tional Association of Sedimentologists Special Publi- Ikeda S, Parker G, and Sawai K (1981) Bend theory of
cation 6. Oxford: Blackwell, 121–132. river meanders – 1. Linear development. Journal of
Hooke JM and Yorke L (2011) Channel bar dynamics on Fluid Mechanics 112: 363–377.
multi-decadal timescales in an active meandering river. Imran J, Parker G, and Pirmez C (1999) A nonlinear model
Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 36(14): of flow in meandering submarine and subaerial chan-
1910–1928. nels. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 400: 295–331.
Hooke JM, Gautier E, and Zolezzi G (2011) River meander Jansen P, Van Bendegom L, Van Den Berg J, et al. (1979)
dynamics: Developments in modelling and empirical Principles of River Engineering: The Non-Tidal Allu-
analyses. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 36: vial River. London: Pitman.
1550–1553. Jefferson WS (1902) Limiting width of meander belts.
Hooke RLB (1975) Distribution of sediment transport and National Geographic Magazine 13: 373–383.
shear stress in a meander bend. Journal of Geolology Johannesson H and Parker G (1989) Linear theory of river
83: 543–565. meanders. In: Ikeda S and Parker G (eds) River
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
26 Progress in Physical Geography
Meandering, Water Resources Monograph 12. River, California, USA. Environmental Management
Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union, 30: 209–224.
181–214. Lauer JW and Parker G (2008) Modeling framework for
Jones KL, Poole GC, O’Daniel SJ, et al. (2008) Surface sediment deposition, storage, and evacuation in the
hydrology of low-relief landscapes: Assessing surface floodplain of a meandering river: Theory. Water
water flow impedance using LIDAR-derived digital Resources Research 44: W04425.
elevation models. Remote Sensing of Environment Lawler DM (1993) The measurement of river bank erosion
112: 4148–4158. and lateral channel change: A review. Earth Surface
Kalkwijk JPT and De Vriend HJ (1980) Computation of Processes and Landforms 18: 777–821.
the flow in shallow river bends. Journal of Hydraulic Leliavsky S (1955) An Introduction to Fluvial Hydraulics:
Resources 18: 327–342. London: Constable.
Kalliola R and Puhakka M (1988) River dynamics and Leopold LB and Wolman MG (1960) River meanders.
vegetation mosaicism: A case study of the River Geological Society of America Bulletin 71: 769–793.
Kamajohka, northernmost Finland. Journal of Bio- Lewis GW and Lewin J (1983) Alluvial cutoffs in
geography 15: 703–719. Wales and the Borderlands. In: Collinson JD and
Kamen EW and Heck BS (1997) Fundamentals of Signals Lewin J (eds) Modern and Ancient Fluvial Systems.
and Systems Using MATLAB. Upper Saddle River, NJ: International Association of Sedimentologists Series,
Prentice Hall. Special Publication Number 6. Oxford: Blackwell,
Keller EA (1972) Development of alluvial stream chan- 145–154.
nels: Development of five-stage model. Geological McKenney R, Jacobson RB, and Wertheimer RC (1995)
Society of America Bulletin 83: 1531–1540. Woody vegetation and channel morphogenesis in low-
Kinoshita R (1961) Investigation of Channel Deformation gradient, gravel-bed streams in the Ozark Plateaus,
in Ishikari River. Tokyo: Bureau of Resources, Missouri and Arkansas. Geomorphology 13: 175–198.
Department of Science and Technology. Malanson GP (1993) Riparian Landscapes. Cambridge:
Kondolf GM (2006) River restoration and meanders. Cambridge University Press.
Ecology and Society 11(2): 42. Marston RA, Mills JD, Wrazien DR, et al. (2005) Effects
Lagasse PF, Spitz WJ, and Zevenbergen LW (2004) of Jackson Lake Dam on the Snake River and its
Handbook for Predicting Stream Meander Migration. floodplain, Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming,
National Cooperative Highway Research Program. USA. Geomorphology 71: 79–98.
Washington, DC: Transportation Research Board, 97 Masterman R and Thorne CR (1992) Predicting influence
pp. of bank vegetation on channel capacity. Journal of
Lancaster ST and Bras RL (2002) A simple model of river Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE 118: 1052–1058.
meandering and its comparison to natural channels. Meitzen KM (2009) Lateral channel migration effects on
Hydrological Processes 16: 1–26. riparian forest structure and composition, Congaree
Langbein WB and Leopold LB (1966) River meanders – River, South Carolina, USA. Wetlands 29: 465–475.
theory of minimum variance. US Geological Survey Micheli ER and Kirchner JW (2002a) Effects of wet
Professional Paper 422-H, 18 pp. meadow riparian vegetation on streambank erosion. 1.
Langendoen EJ and Alonso CV (2008) Modeling the Remote sensing measurements of streambank migra-
evolution of incised streams: I. Model formulation and tion and erodibility. Earth Surface Processes and
validation of flow and streambed evolution compo- Landforms 27: 627–639.
nents. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE 134: Micheli ER and Kirchner JW (2002b) Effects of wet
749–762. meadow riparian vegetation on streambank erosion. 2.
Langendoen EJ and Simon A (2008) Modeling the evolu- Measurements of vegetated bank strength and conse-
tion of incised streams. II: Streambank erosion. Journal quences for failure mechanics. Earth Surface Processes
of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE 134: 905–915. and Landforms 27(7): 687–697.
Larsen EW and Greco SE (2002) Modeling channel Micheli ER, Kirchner JW, and Larsen EW (2004) Quan-
management impacts on river migration: A case study tifying the effect of riparian forest versus agricultural
of Woodson Bridge State Recreation Area, Sacramento vegetation on river meander migration rates, central
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Güneralp and Marston 27
Sacramento River, California, USA. River Research Parker G, Diplas P, and Akiyama J (1983) Meander bends
and Applications 20(5): 537–548. of high amplitude. Journal of the Hydraulics Division,
Mosselman E (1998) Morphological modelling of rivers with ASCE 109(10): 1323–1337.
erodible banks. Hydrological Processes 12: 1357–1370. Parker G, Sawai K, and Ikeda S (1982) Bend theory of
Mosselman E and Crosato A (1991) Universal bank erosion river meanders. Part 2. Nonlinear deformation of finite-
coefficient for meandering rivers – discussion. Journal amplitude bends. Journal of Fluid Mechanics 115:
of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE 117: 942–943. 303–314.
Motta D, Abad JD, Langendoen EJ, and Garcia MH (2012) Parker G, Shimizu Y, Wilkerson GV, Eke EC, Abad JD,
A simplified 2D model for meander migration with Lauer JW, et al. (2011) A new framework for modeling
physically-based bank evolution. Geomorphology the migration of meandering rivers. Earth Surface
163–164: 10–25. Processes and Landforms 36(1): 70–86.
Nanson GC and Beach HF (1977) Forest succession and Peakall J, Ashworth PJ, and Best JL (2007) Meander-bend
sedimentation on a meandering-river floodplain, evolution, alluvial architecture, and the role of cohe-
Northeast British Columbia, Canada. Journal of sion in sinuous river channels: A flume study. Journal
Biogeography 4: 229–251. of Sediment Research 77: 197–212.
Nanson GC and Hickin EJ (1983) Channel migration and Perucca E, Camporeale C, and Ridolfi L (2006) Influence
incision of the Beaton River. Journal of Hydraulic of river meandering dynamics on riparian vegetation
Engineering, ASCE 109: 327–337. pattern formation. Journal of Geophysical Research
Nardi L, Rinaldi M, and Solari L (2012) An experimental 111: G01001.
investigation on mass failures occurring in a riverbank Perucca E, Camporeale C, and Ridolfi L (2007) Sig-
composed of sandy gravel. Geomorphology 163–164: nificance of the riparian vegetation dynamics on
56–69. meandering river morphodynamics. Water Resources
Nelson JM and Smith DJ (1989) Evolution and stability of Research 43: W03430.
erodible channel bends. In: Ikeda S and Parker G (eds) Piégay H, Bornette G, Citterio A, et al. (2000) Channel
River Meandering, Water Resources Monograph 12. instability as a control on silting dynamics and vege-
Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union, tation patterns within perifluvial aquatic zones.
321–377. Hydrological Processes 14: 3011–3029.
Odgaard AJ (1987) Streambank erosion along two Piégay H, Darby SE, Mosselman E, and Surian N (2005) A
rivers in Iowa. Water Resources Research 23: review of techniques available for delimiting the
1225–1236. erodible river corridor: A sustainable approach to
Olsen NRB (2003) Three-dimensional CFD modeling of managing bank erosion. River Research and Applica-
self-forming meandering channel. Journal of Hydrau- tions 21: 773–789.
lic Engineering, ASCE 129: 366–372. Pittaluga MB, Nobile G, and Seminara G (2009) A non-
Osman AM and Thorne CR (1988) Riverbank stability linear model for river meandering. Water Resources
analysis. I: Theory. Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, Research 45: W04432.
ASCE 114: 134–150. Pizzuto JE and Meckelnburg TS (1989) Evaluation of a
Parker G and Andrews ED (1985) Sorting of bed-load sedi- linear bank erosion equation. Water Resources
ment by flow in meander bends. Water Resources Research 25: 1005–1013.
Research 21: 1361–1373. Poole GC (2002) Fluvial landscape ecology: Addressing
Parker G and Andrews ED (1986) On the time develop- uniqueness within the river discontinuum. Freshwater
ment of meander bends. Journal of Fluid Mechanics Biology 47: 641–660.
162: 139–156. Robertson KM (2001) The influnce of fluvial geomorphic
Parker G and Johannesson H (1989) Observations on processes on spatial patterns of forest primary succesion.
several recent theories of resonance and overdeepening PhD thesis, University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign.
in meandering channels. In: Ikeda S and Parker G (eds) Robertson KM (2006) Distributions of tree species
River Meandering, Water Resources Monograph 12. along point bars of 10 rivers in the south-eastern US
Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union, Coastal Plain. Journal of Biogeography 33:
379–416. 121–132.
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
28 Progress in Physical Geography
Robertson KM and Augspurger CK (1999) Geomorphic Smith JD and McLean SR (1984) A model for flow in
processes and spatial patterns of primary forest suc- meandering streams. Water Resources Research 20:
cession on the Bogue Chitto River, USA. Journal of 1301–1315.
Ecology 87: 1052–1063. Solari L, Zolezzi G, and Seminara S (1999) Curvature
Rodriguez-Iturbe I and Porporato A (2005) Ecohydrology driven distortion of free bars in river bends. In: Semi-
of Water Controlled Ecosystems: Soil Moisture and nara G and Blondeaux P (eds) RCEM 1999, Proceed-
Plant Dynamics. Cambridge: Cambridge University ings of the 1st IAHR Symposium on River, Coastal and
Press, 460 pp. Estuarine Morphodynamics, Genova, 6–10 September,
Rodriguez-Iturbe I, D’Odorico P, Porporato A, and Ridolfi 563–573.
L (1999) On the spatial and temporal links between Speight JG (1965) Flow and channel characteristics of the
vegetation, climate, and soil moisture. Water Angabunga River, Papua. Journal of Hydrology 3:
Resources Research 35(12): 3709–3722. 16–36.
Ruther N and Olsen NRB (2007) Modelling free-forming Speight JG (1967) Spectral analysis of meanders of some
meander evolution in a laboratory channel using Australasian rivers. In: Jennings JN and Mabbutt JA
three-dimensional computational fluid dynamics. (eds) Landform Studies from Australia and New
Geomorphology 89: 308–319. Guinea. New York: Cambridge University Press,
Salo J, Kalliola R, Hakkinen I, et al. (1986) River 48–63.
dynamics and the diversity of Amazon lowland forest. Stella JC, Hayden MK, Battles JJ, et al. (2011) The role
Nature 322: 254–258. of abandoned channels as refugia for sustaining
Scheidegger AE (1967) A thermodynamic analogy for pioneer riparian forest ecosystems. Ecosystems 14:
meander systems. Water Resources Research 3: 776–790.
1041–1046. Stølum HH (1996) River meandering as a self-
Schumm SA (1967) Meander wavelength of alluvial organization process. Science 271: 1710–1713.
rivers. Science 157: 1549–1550. Struiksma N, Olesen K, Flokstra C, and De Vriend H
Seminara G (1998) Stability and morphodynamics. (1985) Bed deformation in curved alluvial channels.
Meccanica 33: 59–99. Journal of Hydraulic Research 23: 57–79.
Seminara G (2006) Meanders. Journal of Fluid Mechanics Sun T, Meakin P, and Jøssang T (2001a) A computer
554: 271–297. model for meandering rivers with multiple bed load
Seminara G (2010) Fluvial sedimentary patterns. Annual sediment sizes 1. Theory. Water Resources Research
Review of Fluid Mechanics 42: 43–66. 37: 2227–2241.
Seminara G and Tubino M (1989) Alternate bars and Sun T, Meakin P, and Jøssang T (2001b) A computer
meandering: Free, forced, and mixed interactions. In: model for meandering rivers with multiple bed load
Ikeda S and Parker G (eds) River Meandering, Water sediment sizes 2. Computer simulations. Water
Resources Monograph 12. Washington, DC: American Resources Research 37: 2243–2258.
Geophysical Union, 267–320. Sun T, Meakin P, Jøssang T, and Schwarz K (1996) A
Seminara G and Tubino M (1992) Weakly nonlinear the- simulation model for meandering rivers. Water
ory of regular meanders. Journal of Fluid Mechanics Resources Research 32: 2937–2954.
244: 257–288. Swanson DC (1993) The importance of fluvial processes
Seminara G, Zolezzi G, Tubino M, and Zardi D (2001) and related reservoir deposits. Journal of Petroleum
Downstream and upstream influence in river mean- Technology 45(4) 368–377.
dering. Part 2. Planimetric development. Journal of Termini D (2009) Experimental observations of flow and
Fluid Mechanics 438: 213–230. bed processes in large-amplitude meandering flume.
Shen HW (1984) Examination of present knowledge of Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, ASCE 135:
river meandering. In: Elliot CM (ed.) River Mean- 575–587.
dering: Proceedings of the Conference Rivers ’83, New Thakur TR and Scheidegger AE (1968) A test of the sta-
Orleans. New York: American Society of Civil Engi- tistical theory of meander formation. Water Resources
neers, 1008–1012. Research 4: 317–329.
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
Güneralp and Marston 29
Thakur TR and Scheidegger AE (1970) Chain model of anthropogenic bank materials using a model of lat-
river meanders. Journal of Hydrology 12: 25–47. eral migration and observed erosion along the
Thompson A (1986) Secondary flows and the pool-riffle unit Willamette River, Oregon, USA. River Research
– a case-study of the processes of meander development. and Applications 22: 631–649.
Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 11: 631–641. Ward JV (1997) Riverine landscapes: Biodiversity pat-
Thomson J (1876) On the origin of windings of rivers in terns, disturbance regimes, and aquatic conservation.
alluvial plains, with remarks on the flow of water round Biological Conservation 83: 269–278.
bends in pipes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Ward JV, Tockner K, Arscott DB, and Claret C (2002)
London 25: 5–8. Riverine landscape diversity. Freshwater Biology 47:
Thorne CR and Lewin J (1982) Bank processes, bed 517–539.
material movement and planform development in a Whiting PJ and Dietrich WE (1993a) Experimental studies
meandering river. In: Rhodes DD and Williams GP of bed topography and flow patterns in large-amplitude
(eds) Adjustments of the Fluvial System: Proceedings meanders. 1. Observations. Water Resources Research
of 10th Geomorphology Binghamton Symposium, New 29: 3605–3614.
York, 21–22 September 1979, 117–137. Whiting PJ and Dietrich WE (1993b) Experimental studies
Tinkler KJ (1970) Pools, riffles, and meanders. Geological of bed topography and flow patterns in large-amplitude
Society of America Bulletin 81(2): 547–552. meanders. 2. Mechanisms. Water Resources Research
Tubino M and Seminara G (1990) Free-forced interactions 29: 3615–3622.
in developing meanders and suppression of free bars. Wynn T and Mostaghimi S (2006) The effects of vegeta-
Journal of Fluid Mechanics 214: 131–159. tion and soil type on streambank erosion, southwestern
Van De Wiel MJ and Darby SE (2004) Numerical mod- Virginia, USA. Journal of the American Water
eling of bed topography and bank erosion along tree- Resources Association 42: 69–82.
lined meandering rivers. In: Bennett SJ and Simon A Zimmerman C and Kennedy JF (1978) Transverse bed
(eds) Riparian Vegetation and Fluvial Geomorphol- slopes in curved alluvial streams. Journal of the
ogy. Water Science and Application Series 8. Washing- Hydraulics Division, ASCE 104: 33–48.
ton, DC: American Geophysical Union, 267–282. Zimmermann C (1977) Roughness effects on flow direc-
Van De Wiel MJ, Coulthard TJ, Macklin MG, and Lewin J tion near curved stream beds. Journal of Hydraulic
(2007) Embedding reach-scale fluvial dynamics within Research 15: 73–85.
the CAESAR cellular automaton landscape evolution Zinger JA, Rhoads BL, and Best JL (2011) Extreme
model. Geomorphology 90: 283–301. sediment pulses generated by bend cutoffs along a
Van De Wiel MJ, Coulthard TJ, Macklin MG, and Lewin J large meandering river. Nature Geoscience 4:
(2011) Modelling the response of river systems to 675–678.
environmental change: Progress, problems and pros- Zolezzi G and Seminara G (2001) Downstream and
pects for palaeo-environmental reconstructions. Earth- upstream influence in river meandering. Part 1. General
Science Reviews 104: 167–185. theory and application overdeepening. Journal of Fluid
Von Schelling H (1951) Most frequent particle paths in a Mechanics 438: 183–211.
plane. EOS, Transactions, American Geophysical Zolezzi G, Luchi R, and Tubino M (2009) Morphodynamic
Union 32: 222–226. regime of gravel bed, single-thread meandering rivers.
Wallick JR, Lancaster ST, and Bolte JP (2006) Deter- Journal of Geophysical Research – Earth Surface 114:
mination of bank erodibility for natural and F01005.
Downloaded from ppg.sagepub.com at KANSAS STATE UNIV LIBRARIES on August 31, 2012
View publication stats