Understanding global ecological patterns and processes, from biogeochemical to biogeographical, requires broad‐scale macrosystems context for comparing and contrasting ecosystems. Climate gradients (precipitation and temperature) and other continental‐scale patterns shape freshwater environments due to their influences on terrestrial environments and their direct and indirect effects on the abiotic and biotic characteristics of lakes, streams, and wetlands. We combined literature review, analyses of open access data, and logical argument to assess abiotic and biotic characters of freshwater systems across gradients of latitude and elevation that drive precipitation, temperature, and other variability. We explored the predictive value of analyzing patterns in freshwater ecosystems at the global macrosystems scale. We found many patterns based on climate, particularly those dependent upon hydrologic characteristics and linked to characteristics of terrestrial biomes. For example, continental waters of dry areas will generally be widely dispersed and have higher probability of drying and network disconnection, greater temperatures, greater inorganic turbidity, greater salinity, and lower riparian canopy cover relative to areas with high precipitation. These factors will influence local community composition and ecosystem rates. Enough studies are now available at the continental or global scale to start to characterize patterns under a coherent conceptual framework, though considerable gaps exist in the tropics and less developed regions. We present illustrative global‐scale trends of abiotic, biotic, and anthropogenic impacts in freshwater ecosystems across gradients of precipitation and temperature to further understanding of broad‐scale trends and to aid prediction in the face of global change. We view freshwater systems as occurring across arrays of multiple gradients (including latitude, altitude, and precipitation) rather than areas with specific boundaries. While terrestrial biomes capture some variability along these gradients that influence freshwaters, other features such as, slope, geology, and historical glaciation also influence freshwaters. Our conceptual framework is not so much a single hypothesis as a way to logically characterize patterns in freshwaters at scales relevant to (1) evolutionary processes that give rise to freshwater biodiversity, (2) regulatory units that influence freshwater ecosystems, and (3) the current scope of anthropogenic impacts on freshwaters and the vital ecosystem services they provide.

HighlightsEleven general streambank stabilization (SBS) techniques have been used worldwide.Rules-of-thumb and practitioner experience are still heavily applied in SBS design.Research needs include assessing the spatiotemporal variability of SBS and improving numerical simulation.Future SBS experiments need to include design details with results that can be easily communicated to designers.Abstract. Streambank stabilization techniques, designed to maximize localized streambank shear strength and/or minimize the forces acting on a streambank, have been in existence for centuries and are still a popular river management technique used by practitioners worldwide. The purpose of this literature review is to identify common streambank stabilization techniques, compile and summarize the recent peer-reviewed journal articles on these techniques, and determine research needs. Eleven general streambank stabilization practices, consisting of both instream structures and streambank management techniques, are identified in this literature review. Over 140 peer-reviewed journal articles on these techniques have been published over the last 20 years. To improve design and implementation of streambank stabilization techniques, two major research needs were identified: (1) further assess and quantify the spatiotemporal effects that streambank stabilization practices have on bank erosion, hydraulics, sediment transport, and habitat and (2) continue to improve numerical models for streambank stabilization design in order to holistically evaluate and address these effects. In addition, a list of specific research needs for each stabilization technique is provided. To help address these research needs, it is recommended that future streambank stabilization publications should (1) use consistent technique nomenclature, (2) provide characteristic details about the techniques and channels studied, (3) justify the experimental setup, and (4) explain how the research will improve streambank stabilization design. Keywords: Bankfull bench, Barb, Bioengineering, Deflector, Dike, Dyke, Groin, Groyne, Jetty, Large woody debris, LPSTP, Retarder, Revetment, Riprap bank, River training, Shaping, Spur, Stream restoration, Streambank erosion, Streambank stabilization, Toe rock, Toe

No abstract

HighlightsThe JET is a key instrument for in situ and laboratory measurement of soil erodibility.Operation and reporting guidelines are needed to ensure consistency across JETs and applications.JET design improvements and hydrodynamic studies are needed to inform proper analyses and limit operator effects.Erodibility databases should be developed that report JET, soil, and fluid properties. Keywords: Cohesive soils, Critical shear stress, Erodibility, Erosion, Jet Erosion Test, Scour.

Accelerated streambank erosion caused by channel instability can be the leading cause of sediment impairment of streams. Obtaining accurate streambank erosion rates for sediment budgeting and prioritizing mitigation efforts can be difficult and costly. One approach to quantifying streambank erosion rates is through the development and implementation of an empirically derived “Bank Assessment for Non‐point Source Consequences of Sediment” (BANCS) model. This study aims to improve the BANCS model application by evaluating repeatability between users and identifying sensitive and/or uncertain model inputs. Statistical analysis of streambank evaluations conducted by 10 different individuals suggests the implementation of the BANCS model may not be repeatable. This finding may be due to sensitive model inputs, such as streambank height and near‐bank stress level prediction method selection, and/or uncertain model inputs, such as bank material identification and the associated adjustment of erosion potential. Furthermore, it was found assessing streambanks as a group by obtaining a measure of central tendency from individual evaluations, as well as obtaining a higher level of training, may improve model implementation precision. Application of these suggestions may result in improved prediction of streambank erosion rates utilizing the BANCS model methodology.