Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Characterizing natural riparian vegetation for modeling of flow and suspended sediment transport

  • Physical and Ecological Aspects of Mobile Sediments
  • Published:
Journal of Soils and Sediments Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Correction to this article was published on 04 November 2017

This article has been updated

Abstract

Purpose

Riparian vegetation imposes a critical control on the transport and deposition of suspended sediment with important implications for water quality and channel maintenance. This paper contributes (1) to hydraulic and morphological modeling by examining the parameterization of natural riparian vegetation (trees, bushes, and grasses) and (2) to the design and management of environmental channels by determining how the properties of natural floodplain plant stands affect the erosion and deposition of suspended sediment.

Materials and methods

Laboratory and field data were employed for enhancing the physical description of flow–plant–sediment interactions with a consideration of practical applicability. A drag force parameterization that takes into account the flexibility-induced reconfiguration, and the complex structure of foliated plants was validated for small natural trees under laboratory conditions, while the data from a small vegetated compound channel demonstrated the approaches at the field scale. Based on the field data, we identified three key vegetative factors influencing the net deposition and erosion on the floodplain. The significance of these factors was evaluated for vegetative conditions ranging from almost bare soil to sparse willows and dense grasses. Overall, the investigated conditions covered flexible and rigid vegetation with seasonal differences represented by foliated and leafless states.

Results and discussion

The drag and reconfiguration of woody plants were reliably predicted under leafless and foliated conditions. Subsequently, we present a new easy-to-use methodology for predicting vegetative drag and flow resistance. The methodology is based on a physically solid parameterization for five widely used coefficients or terms (Eqs. (2)–(6)), with the necessary parameter values presented for common riparian species. The methodology was coupled with existing approaches at the field scale, revealing that increasing vegetation density and the associated decreasing flow velocity within vegetation significantly increased net deposition. Further, deposition increased with increasing cross-sectional vegetative blockage and decreasing distance from the suspended sediment replenishment point. Thus, longitudinal advection was the most important mechanism supplying fine sediment to the floodplain, but long continuous plant stands limited deposition.

Conclusions

The proposed parameterization (Eqs. (2)–(6)) can be readily implemented into existing hydraulic and morphological models to improve the description of natural vegetation compared to the conventional rigid cylinder representation. The approach is advantageous for evaluating, for example, the effects of both natural succession and management interventions on floodplains. Finally, guidance is provided on how floodplain vegetation can be maintained to manage the erosion and deposition of suspended sediment in environmental channel designs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12

Similar content being viewed by others

Change history

  • 04 November 2017

    The authors regret that the article contains a typing mistake in Eq. (5), with an u C 2 term accidentally appearing at the right hand side of the squared brackets.

References

  • Aberle J, Järvelä J (2013) Flow resistance of emergent rigid and flexible vegetation. J Hydraul Res 51(1):33–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aberle J, Järvelä J (2015) Hydrodynamics of vegetated channels. In: Rowinski P, Radecki-Pawlik A (eds) Rivers—physical, fluvial and environmental processes. GeoPlanet: earth and planetary sciences. Springer, Berlin, pp 519–541

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Arboleda AM, Crosato A, Middelkoop H (2010) Reconstructing the early 19th century Waal River by means of a 2D physics-based numerical model. Hydrol Process 24(25):3661–3675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayotte KW, Finnigan JJ, Raupach MR (1999) A second-order closure for neutrally stratified vegetative canopy flows. Bound-Layer Meteorol 90:189–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belcher SE, Harman IN, Finnigan JJ (2012) The wind in the willows: flows in forest canopies in complex terrain. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 44:479–504

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boothroyd RJ, Hardy RJ, Warburton J, Marjoribanks TI (2015) The importance of accurately representing submerged vegetation morphology in the numerical prediction of complex river flow. Earth Surf Process Landforms 41(4):567–576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bos AR, Bouma TJ, de Kort GLJ, van Katwijk MM (2007) Ecosystem engineering by annual intertidal seagrass beds: sediment accretion and modification. Estuar Coast Shelf S 74:344–348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branß T, Dittrich A, Núñez-González F (2016) Reproducing natural levee formation in an experimental flume. In: Constantinescu G, Garcia M, Hanes D (eds) River flow 2016. CRC Press, London, pp 1122–1128

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Corenblit D, Steiger J, Gurnell AM, Tabacchi E, Roques L (2009) Control of sediment dynamics by vegetation as a key function driving biogeomorphic succession within fluvial corridors. Earth Surf Process Landforms 34(13):1790–1810

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Di Stefano C, Ferro V, Mirabile S (2010) Comparison between grain-size analyses using laser diffraction and sedimentation methods. Biosyst Eng 106:105–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dittrich A, Aberle J, Schoneboom T (2012) Drag forces and flow resistance of flexible riparian vegetation. In: Rodi W, Uhlmann M (eds) Environmental fluid mechanics: memorial volume in honour of prof. Gerhard H. Jirka, IAHR monographs. CRC Press, London, pp 195–215

    Google Scholar 

  • Droppo I (2001) Rethinking what constitutes suspended sediment. Hydrol Process 15:1551–1564

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fleischer P, Soyeaux R (2013) Technical-biological bank protection on waterways with high traffic frequency—first experience gained from a test stretch at the River Rhine with regard to bank stability. In: Rigo P, Wolters M (eds) Proceedings, 6th International PIANC-Smart Rivers Conference, 23–27 September 2013, Liège, Belgium/Maastricht, the Netherlands, 10 pp

  • Ganthy F, Soissons L, Sauria PG, Verney R, Sottolichio A (2015) Effects of short flexible seagrass Zostera noltei on flow, erosion and deposition processes determined using flume experiments. Sedimentology 62:997–1023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Geerling GW, Kater E, van den Brink C, Baptist MJ, Ragas AMJ, Smits AJM (2008) Nature rehabilitation by floodplain excavation: the hydraulic effect of 16 years of sedimentation and vegetation succession along the Waal River, NL. Geomorphology 99(1–4):317–328

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gurnell A (2014) Plants as river system engineers. Earth Surf Process Landforms 39:4–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jalonen J, Järvelä J (2014) Estimation of drag forces caused by natural woody vegetation of different scales. J Hydrodyn 26:608–623

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jalonen J, Järvelä J, Aberle J (2013) Leaf area index as vegetation density measure for hydraulic analyses. J Hydraul Eng 139(5):461–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jalonen J, Järvelä J, Virtanen J-P, Vaaja M, Kurkela M, Hyyppä H (2015) Determining characteristic vegetation areas by terrestrial laser scanning for floodplain flow modeling. Water 7(2):420–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Järvelä J (2004) Determination of flow resistance caused by non-submerged woody vegetation. Int J River Basin Manag 2(1):61–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jeffries R, Darby SE, Sear DA (2003) The influence of vegetation and organic debris on flood plain sediment dynamics: case study of a loworder stream in the New Forest, England. Geomorphology 51:61–80

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kang H, Choi S-U (2006) Turbulence modeling of compound open-channel flows with and without vegetation on the floodplain using the Reynolds stress model. Adv Water Res 29:1650–1664

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kasvi E, Alho P, Lotsari E, Wang Y, Kukko A, Hyyppä H, Hyyppä J (2015) Two-dimensional and three-dimensional computational models in hydrodynamic and morphodynamic reconstructions of a river bend: sensitivity and functionality. Hydrol Process 29:1604–1629

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konings AG, Katul GG, Thompson SE (2012) A phenomenological model for the flow resistance over submerged vegetation. Water Resour Res 48:W02522. doi:10.1029/2011WR011000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kouwen N, Fathi-Moghadam M (2000) Friction factors for coniferous trees along rivers. J Hydraul Eng 126:732–740

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Langre E (2008) Effects of wind on plants. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 40:141–168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li M-H, Eddleman KE (2002) Biotechnical engineering as an alternative to traditional engineering methods: a biotechnical streambank stabilization design approach. Landscape Urban Plan 60:225–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li X, Zhang L, Zhang Z (2006) Soil bioengineering and the ecological restoration of riverbanks at the airport town, Shanghai, China. Ecol Eng 26:304–314

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • López F, García M (1998) Open-channel flow through simulated vegetation: suspended sediment transport modeling. Water Resour Res 34(9):2341–2352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luhar M, Nepf H (2013) From the blade scale to the reach scale: a characterization of aquatic vegetative drag. Adv Water Resour 51:305–316

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luhar M, Rominger J, Nepf H (2008) Interaction between flow, transport and vegetation spatial structure. Environ Fluid Mech 8:423–439

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ma L, Zheng G, Eitel JUH, Magney TS, Moskal LM (2016) Determining woody-to-total area ratio using terrestrial laser scanning (TLS). Agric For Meteorol 228–229:217–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mahl UH, Tank JL, Roley SS, Davis RT (2015) Two-stage ditch floodplains enhance N-removal capacity and reduce turbidity and dissolved P in agricultural streams. JAWRA 51(4):923–940

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Manners R, Wilcox AC, Kui L, Lightbody A, Stella J, Sklar L (2015) When do plants modify fluvial processes? Plant-hydraulic interactions under variable flow and sediment supply rates. Water Resour Res 120(2):325–345

    Google Scholar 

  • McGahey C, Samuels PG, Knight DW, O’Hare MT (2008) Estimating river flow capacity in practice. J Flood Risk Manage 1(1):23–33

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Middelkoop H, Asselman NEM (1998) Spatial variability of floodplain sedimentation at the event scale in the Rhine-Meuse Delta, the Netherlands. Earth Surf Process Landforms 23:561–573

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Naiman RJ, Décamps H (1997) The ecology of interfaces: riparian zones. Annu Rev Ecol Syst 28:621–658

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nepf H (2012) Flow and transport in regions with aquatic vegetation. Annu Rev Fluid Mech 44:123–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Niklas KJ (1997) Size- and age-dependent variation in the properties of sap- and heartwood in black locust (Robinia pseudoacacia L.) Annal Bot 79:473–478

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Hare M (2015) Aquatic vegetation—a primer for hydrodynamic specialists. J Hydraul Res 53(6):687–698

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osterkamp WR, Hupp CR, Stoffel M (2012) The interactions between vegetation and erosion: new directions for research at the interface of ecology and geomorphology. Earth Surf Process Landforms 37:23–36

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owens PN, Batalla RJ, Collins AJ, Gomez B, Hicks DM, Horowitz AJ, Kondolf GM, Marden M, Page MJ, Peacock DH, Petticrew EL, Salomons W, Trustrum NA (2005) Fine-grained sediment in river systems: environmental significance and management issues. River Res Applic 21:693–717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pasquale N, Perona P, Francis R, Burlando P (2014) Above-ground and be-low-ground Salix dynamics in response to river processes. Hydrol Process 28:5189–5203

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peltola HM (2006) Mechanical stability of trees under static loads. Am J Bot 93(10):1501–1511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peralta G, van Duren LA, Morris EP, Bouma TJ (2008) Consequences of shoot density and stiffness for ecosystem engineering by benthic macrophytes in flow dominated areas: a hydrodynamic flume study. Mar Ecol Prog Ser 368:103–115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schuurman F, Marra WA, Kleinhans MG (2013) Physics-based modeling of large braided sand-bed rivers: bar pattern formation, dynamics, and sensitivity. J Geophys Res Earth Surf 118:2509–2527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sellin RHJ, van Beesten DP (2004) Conveyance of a managed vegetated two-stage river channel. Water Management 157(1):21–33

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharpe RG, James CS (2006) Deposition of sediment from suspension in emergent vegetation. Water SA 32(2):211–218

    Google Scholar 

  • Shields FD Jr, Coulton KG, Nepf H (2017) Representation of vegetation in two-dimensional hydrodynamic models. J Hydraul Eng 02517002. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0001320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiono K, Muto Y (1998) Complex flow mechanisms in compound meandering channels with overbank flow. J Fluid Mech 376:221–261

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solari L, van Oorschot M, Belletti B, Hendriks D, Rinaldi M, Vargas-Luna A (2016) Advances on modeling riparian vegetation–hydromorphology interactions. River Res Applic 32:164–178

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Studer R, Zeh H (2014) Soil bioengineering—construction type manual. Verein für Ingenieurbiologie, European Federation for Soil Bioengineering. vdf Hochschulverlag AG der ETH Zürich, Switzerland. 440 pp. ISBN 978–3–7281-3642-8. [Open access, http://vdf-online.ch/soil-bioengineering/]

  • Sukhodolov AN, Sukhodolova TA (2012) Vegetated mixing layer around a finite-size patch of submerged plants: part 2. Turbulence statistics and structures. Water Resour Res 48:W12506. doi:10.1029/2011WR011805

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thonon I, Roberti JR, Middelkoop H, van der Perk M, Burrough PA (2005) In situ measurements of sediment settling characteristics in floodplains using a LISST-ST. Earth Surf Process Landforms 30:1327–1343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thornton CI, Abt SR, Clary WP (1997) Vegetation influence on small stream siltation. J Am Water Resour As 33(6):1279–1288

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • USDA (2007) Two-stage channel design. In National Engineering Handbook, part 654, stream restoration design. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service

  • Uusitalo R, Yli-Halla M, Turtola E (2000) Suspended soil as a source of potentially bioavailable phosphorus in surface runoff waters from clay soils. Water Res 34(9):2477–2482

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Vargas-Luna A, Crosato A, Calvani G, Uijttewaal WSJ (2015a) Representing plants as rigid cylinders in experiments and models. Adv Water Resourc 93(B):205–222

    Google Scholar 

  • Vargas-Luna A, Crosato A, Uijttewaal WSJ (2015b) Effects of vegetation on flow and sediment transport: comparative analyses and validation of predicting models. Earth Surf Process Landforms 40:157–176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Västilä K (2015) Flow–plant–sediment interactions: vegetative resistance modeling and cohesive sediment processes. Doctoral thesis, Aalto University School of Engineering, Espoo, Finland. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-60-6597-7

  • Västilä K, Järvelä J (2011) Environmentally preferable two-stage drainage channels: considerations for cohesive sediments and conveyance. Int J River Basin Manage 9(3–4):171–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Västilä K, Järvelä J (2014) Modeling the flow resistance of woody vegetation using physically-based properties of the foliage and stem. Water Resour Res 50(1):229–245

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Västilä K, Järvelä J, Jalonen J (2015) Effect of floodplain vegetation on flow and transport of cohesive particles in an environmental two-stage channel. In: Proceedings, 36th IAHR World Congress, 28.6.–3.7.2015, Delft – The Hague, the Netherlands

  • Västilä K, Järvelä J, Koivusalo H (2016) Flow–vegetation–sediment interaction in a cohesive compound channel. J Hydraul Eng 142(1):04015034. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)HY.1943-7900.0001058

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Villada Arroyave JA, Crosato A (2010) Effects of river floodplain lowering and vegetation cover. Water management WM9:457–467

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vogel S (1994) Life in moving fluids—the physical biology of flow, 2nd edn. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Google Scholar 

  • Whittaker P, Wilson C, Aberle J (2015) An improved Cauchy number approach for predicting the drag and reconfiguration of flexible vegetation. Adv Water Res 83:28–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wood PJ, Armitage PD (1997) Biological effects of fine sediment in the lotic environment. Environ Manag 21(2):203–217

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Xavier P (2009) Floodplain woodland hydrodynamics. Doctoral thesis, Cardiff School of Engineering, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK

  • Zinke P (2011) Modelling of flow and levee depositions in a freshwater delta with natural vegetation. Doctoral thesis. Faculty of Civil Engineering, Norwegian University of Science and Technology

  • Zinke P, Olsen NRB, Bogen J (2011) Three-dimensional numerical modelling of levee depositions in a Scandinavian freshwater delta. Geomorphology 129:320–333

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zong L, Nepf H (2011) Spatial distribution of deposition within a patch of vegetation. Water Resour Res 47:W03516. doi:10.1029/2010WR009516

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zou J, Yan G, Zhu L, Zhang W (2009) Woody-to-total area ratio determination with a multispectral canopy imager. Tree Physiol 29:1069–1080

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Built Environment, Aalto University School of Engineering, Espoo, Finland

    Kaisa Västilä & Juha Järvelä

Authors
  1. Kaisa Västilä
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Juha Järvelä
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kaisa Västilä.

Additional information

Responsible editor: Gudrun Hillebrand

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Västilä, K., Järvelä, J. Characterizing natural riparian vegetation for modeling of flow and suspended sediment transport. J Soils Sediments 18, 3114–3130 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-017-1776-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11368-017-1776-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation