No abstract

There may be differences between the Accepted Manuscript and the final publisher's version. You are advised to consult the publisher's version if you wish to cite from this article.

This paper contributes a field study of suspended sediment transport through aquatic vegetation. The study was run over a 3 month period which was selected to coincide with scheduled weed cutting activities. This provided the opportunity to obtain data points with no vegetation cover, as well as to investigate the effects of weed cutting on Suspended Sediment Concentrations (SSC), particle size distributions and river hydraulics. Aquatic vegetation cover was quantified through remote sensing with Unmanned Aerial Vehicles and biomass estimated from ground truth sampling. SSC was highly dependent on aquatic vegetation abundance, and the distance upstream that had been cleared of aquatic vegetation. The data indicates that fine sediment was being trapped and stored by aquatic vegetation, then likely remobilised after vegetation removal. Investigation of suspended sediment spatial dynamics illustrated changes in particle size distribution due to preferential settling of coarse particles within aquatic vegetation, for example D50 decreased from 36.08 μm to 15.64 μm after suspended sediment travelled 304.2 m downstream and passed ~3700 kg of aquatic vegetation biomass. Hydraulic resistance in the study reach (parameterized by Manning's n) dropped by over 70% following vegetation cutting. Prior to cutting hydraulic resistance was discharge dependent (likely due to vegetation pronating at higher flows), while post cutting hydraulic resistance was approximately invariant of discharge. Aerial surveying captured interesting changes in aquatic vegetation cover prior to vegetation cutting, where some very dense regions of aquatic vegetation were naturally removed (without any high flow events) leaving behind unvegetated riverbed and fine sediment. The weed cutting boat had a lower impact on SSC than was originally expected, which indicates that it may offer a less damaging solution to aquatic vegetation removal in rivers than some other approaches such as mechanical excavation. This paper contributes valuable field data (which are generally scarce) on the research topic of flow‐vegetation‐sediment interactions, to supplement laboratory and numerical studies.

No abstract

No abstract