[1] At river bifurcations, water and sediment are divided over two branches. The dynamics of the bifurcation determine the long-term evolution (centuries) of the downstream branches, potentially leading to avulsion, but the dynamics are poorly understood. The long-term evolution can only be studied by one-dimensional models because of computational costs. For such models, a relation describing the sediment division is necessary, but only few relations are available and these remain poorly tested so far. We study the division of sediment and the morphodynamics on a timescale of decades to centuries by idealized three-dimensional modeling of bifurcations with upstream meanders and dominantly bed load transport. An upstream meander favors one bifurcate with more sediment and the other with more water, leading to destabilization. The bifurcations commonly attain a highly asymmetrical division of discharge and sediment after a few decades to a few centuries, depending on combinations of the relevant parameters. Although past work on avulsions focused on slope advantage, we found that bifurcations can be quasibalanced by opposing factors, such as a bifurcate connected to the inner bend with a downstream slope advantage. Nearly balanced bifurcations develop much slower than unbalanced bifurcations, which explains the observed variation in avulsion duration in natural systems. Which branch becomes dominant and the timescale to attain model equilibrium are determined by the length of the downstream bifurcates, the radius of the upstream bend, a possible gradient advantage for one bifurcate and, notably, the width-depth ratio. The latter determines the character of the bars which may result in overdeepening and unstable bars. The distance between the beginning of the upstream bend and the bifurcation determines the location of such bars and pools, which may switch the dominant bifurcate. In fact, when the bifurcation is quasibalanced by opposing factors, any minor disturbance or a different choice of roughness or sediment transport predictor may switch the dominant bifurcate. The division of sediment is nearly the same as the division of flow discharge in most runs until the discharge division becomes very asymmetrical, so that a bifurcate does not close off entirely. This partly explains the sustained existence of residual channels and existence of anastomosing rivers and the potential for reoccupation of old channel courses. We develop a new relation for sediment division at bifurcations in one-dimensional models incorporating the effect of meandering. The flow and sediment divisions predicted by two existing relations and the new relation for one-dimensional models are in qualitative agreement with the three-dimensional model. These one-dimensional relations are however of limited value for wider rivers because they lack the highly three-dimensional bar dynamics that may switch the direction of bifurcation evolution. The potential effects of bed sediment sorting, bank erosion, and levee formation on bifurcation stabili...

[1] The number of bars that form in an alluvial channel cross section can be determined from a physics-based linear model for alluvial bed topography. The classical approach defines separators between ranges in which river planform styles with certain numbers of bars are linearly stable and linearly unstable. We propose an alternative method that is easier to apply. Instead of defining separators between stable and unstable conditions for certain river planform styles, the method directly estimates the most likely number of bars. It is based on a demonstration that conditions of zero spatial damping in a linear model for steady bars are representative for the bar mode that develops inside a river channel. We argue that a method based on steady bars is more appropriate for real rivers than a method based on free migrating bars. We verified the method by applying it to several existing rivers at bankfull conditions. The results are good for width-to-depth ratios up to 100 but deteriorate for higher width-to-depth ratios. We explain the deficiencies for large width-to-depth ratios from the linearity of the model. The results show that our method can be used as a reliable predictor for whether reducing or enlarging the width of a river will lead to a meandering, transition, or braided planform.Citation: Crosato, A., and E. Mosselman (2009), Simple physics-based predictor for the number of river bars and the transition between meandering and braiding, Water Resour. Res., 45, W03424,

Contact CEH NORA team at noraceh@ceh.ac.ukThe NERC and CEH trademarks and logos ('the Trademarks') are registered trademarks of NERC in the UK and other countries, and may not be used without the prior written consent of the Trademark owner. 1The following paper is the final version prior to publication on 22 September 2015. are proposed, the way in which indicators could contribute to classification is discussed. All of the methods described in Table 1 consider a hierarchy of spatial units, but the degree to which they develop the other aspects of the conceptual approach proposed by Frissell et al.(1986) varies widely.2. Many of the frameworks focus entirely on hydromorphological processes and forms that are either directly measured or inferred. This is because interactions between processes and forms control the dynamic morphology or behaviour of rivers and their mosaics of habitats.Hydromorphological processes drive longitudinal and lateral connectivity within river networks and corridors, the assemblage and turnover of physical habitats, and the sedimentary and vegetation structures associated with those habitats.3. Some frameworks are conceptual, providing a way of thinking about or structuring analyses of river systems, and interpreting their processes, morphology and function (e.g. Frissell et al., 1986;Habersack, 2000;Fausch et al., 2002;Thorp et al., 2006;Beechie et al., 2010;McCluney et al., 2014). Some frameworks are more quantitative, generating one or more indices or classifications of spatial units that support assessment of river systems (e.g. Rosgen, 1994;González del Tánago and García de Jalón, 2004;Merovich et al., 2013;Rinaldi et al., 2013Rinaldi et al., , 2015a MacDonald, 2002;Brierley and Fryirs, 2005;Beechie et al., 2010; Rinaldi et al., 2013a Rinaldi et al., , 2015.In some cases, theoretical or historical analyses or consideration of specific future scenarios are used to develop space-time understanding that can support management decisionmaking (e.g. Buffington, 1997, 1998;Montgomery and MacDonald, 2002;Benda et al., 2004;Brierley and Fryirs, 2005;McCluney et al., 2014 , 1997, 1998Montgomery and MacDonald, 2002;Benda et al., 2004;Brierley and Fryirs, 2005;Merovich et al., 2013;Rinaldi et al., 2013Rinaldi et al., , 2015a. Furthermore, some of the frameworks include indicators of human pressures and their impacts (e.g. Merovich et al., 2013;McCluney et al., 2014;Rinaldi et al., 2013Rinaldi et al., , 2015a.6. Finally, although most frameworks could be described as incorporating processes to some degree, some methods are particularly process-based, even when processes are inferred from forms and associations rather than being quantified by direct measurements.Frameworks that consider temporal dynamics and trajectories of historical change (see point 4, above) are particularly effective in developing understanding of processes and the impacts of changed processes cascading through time and across spatial scales.Although the list of frameworks presented in Table 1 is far from comprehensive, ...