2009
DOI: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2009.00355.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of Three Pebble Count Protocols (EMAP, PIBO, and SFT) in Two Mountain Gravel‐Bed Streams1

Abstract: Although the term ``pebble count'' is in widespread use, there is no standardized methodology used for the field application of this procedure. Each pebble count analysis is the product of several methodological choices, any of which are capable of influencing the final result. Because there are virtually countless variations on pebble count protocols, the question of how their results differ when applied to the same study reach is becoming increasingly important. This study compared three pebble count protoco… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
41
0
1

Year Published

2011
2011
2018
2018

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(42 citation statements)
references
References 38 publications
0
41
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…The grain‐size distribution (GSD) of the channel bed surface was determined by grid‐by‐number pebble counts in September 2012 using a variant of the Wolman [] procedure, according to Bunte and Abt [, ] and Bunte et al . [] (Figure ). Bed material subsurface GSDs were determined by sieve analysis of three large volumetric samples taken using a three‐sided plywood shield [ Bunte and Abt , ].…”
Section: Field Sites and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The grain‐size distribution (GSD) of the channel bed surface was determined by grid‐by‐number pebble counts in September 2012 using a variant of the Wolman [] procedure, according to Bunte and Abt [, ] and Bunte et al . [] (Figure ). Bed material subsurface GSDs were determined by sieve analysis of three large volumetric samples taken using a three‐sided plywood shield [ Bunte and Abt , ].…”
Section: Field Sites and Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Pebble counts were comprised of a minimum of 200 particles and equally sampled all parts of the bed following Bunte et al (2009) and Harrelson et al (1994). Pebble counts were comprised of a minimum of 200 particles and equally sampled all parts of the bed following Bunte et al (2009) and Harrelson et al (1994).…”
Section: Field Data a Centerline Profile Of The Open Channel Portion mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This continued until a minimum of 100 pebbles was counted. The pebble count procedure is widely used to assess surface sediment composition by regulatory agencies and researchers alike (Bevenger and King, 1995;Bunte et al, 2009) Overlying water depth and velocity was measured at each sample location for each technique applied. Flow measurements associated with infiltration bag and gravel bucket locations should be collected when the sampler is installed in the streambed and then again before it is removed.…”
Section: Site Establishmentmentioning
confidence: 99%