Research Article| April 01, 2000 Influence of sediment supply, lithology, and wood debris on the distribution of bedrock and alluvial channels Tamara M. Massong; Tamara M. Massong 1Department of Geological Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar David R. Montgomery David R. Montgomery 1Department of Geological Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA Search for other works by this author on: GSW Google Scholar GSA Bulletin (2000) 112 (4): 591–599. https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(2000)112<591:IOSSLA>2.0.CO;2 Article history received: 19 Nov 1998 rev-recd: 22 Jun 1999 accepted: 14 Jul 1999 first online: 01 Jun 2017 Cite View This Citation Add to Citation Manager Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Search Site Citation Tamara M. Massong, David R. Montgomery; Influence of sediment supply, lithology, and wood debris on the distribution of bedrock and alluvial channels. GSA Bulletin 2000;; 112 (4): 591–599. doi: https://doi.org/10.1130/0016-7606(2000)112<591:IOSSLA>2.0.CO;2 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Refmanager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentBy SocietyGSA Bulletin Search Advanced Search Abstract Field surveys in the Willapa River basin, Washington State, indicate that the drainage area–channel slope threshold describing the distribution of bedrock and alluvial channels is influenced by the underlying lithology and that local variations in sediment supply can overwhelm basinwide trends. Field data from 90 short-reach surveys indicate that about one-eighth of the surveyed reaches do not conform to a threshold defined by data from free-formed alluvial and bedrock reaches due to the effects of logjams or local sediment sources or sinks. Mapping of channel type distributions in 18 extended reconnaissance surveys of >100 channel widths in channel length show that ∼75% of the channel network was alluvial, but that the proportion of forced alluvial channels varies from 0% to 84%. Using the drainage area–slope thresholds defined by bedrock and alluvial data from the short-reach surveys, only 40% of the total channel length mapped in the longer reconnaissance surveys was correctly classified from a 10 m grid digital elevation model. Of the misclassified reaches, 80% of the alluvial channels predicted to be bedrock had forced alluvial morphologies, while almost half of the bedrock channels predicted to be alluvial were forced by low sediment supply, typically due to their location immediately downstream of large channel-spanning logjams. Poor representation of reach-scale slope in the digital topography and/or a stochastic influence of sediment wave propagation likely account for the remaining misclassified channels, which together compose 7% of the total surveyed channel length. Although variations in sediment supply can locally overwhelm the channel type predicted by the threshold model, the effect of logjams masks any influence of propagating sediment waves on the distribution of bedrock and alluvial channels in the Willapa River basin. You do not have access to this content, please speak to your institutional administrator if you feel you should have access.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Massong et al. (2000) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: