2019
DOI: 10.1002/rra.3481
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Wood Jam Dynamics Database and Assessment Model (WooDDAM): A framework to measure and understand wood jam characteristics and dynamics

Abstract: Wood jams in rivers and on floodplains play an essential role in shaping valley bottoms, and their dynamics regulate the ecology and morphology of river systems.Although wood jams are commonly used to regulate fluvial geomorphic processes and provide habitat, our inability to predict how wood jams change through time hampers wood restoration efforts. We present the Wood Jam Dynamics Database and Assessment Model (WooDDAM) to improve understanding and management of natural and anthropogenic wood jams in rivers.… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
18
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 16 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 49 publications
0
18
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This approach allows quantification of the physical role of LW jams in generating geomorphic and ecological diversity and stabilizing channel networks (Collins et al., 2012; Walter & Merritts, 2008). C A could be used to characterize physical properties of preexisting LW jams (Dixon, 2016; Wohl et al., 2010) and compare LW jams across river systems through collaborative LW data collection (Scott et al., 2019). C A may also be predicted from LW jam length, solid volume fraction, and log diameter, allowing representation of engineered logjam designs in a flood model or network analysis (Hankin et al., 2020; Leakey et al., 2020; Persi et al., 2019; Ruiz Villanueva et al., 2014) as a composite structure (Equations and ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This approach allows quantification of the physical role of LW jams in generating geomorphic and ecological diversity and stabilizing channel networks (Collins et al., 2012; Walter & Merritts, 2008). C A could be used to characterize physical properties of preexisting LW jams (Dixon, 2016; Wohl et al., 2010) and compare LW jams across river systems through collaborative LW data collection (Scott et al., 2019). C A may also be predicted from LW jam length, solid volume fraction, and log diameter, allowing representation of engineered logjam designs in a flood model or network analysis (Hankin et al., 2020; Leakey et al., 2020; Persi et al., 2019; Ruiz Villanueva et al., 2014) as a composite structure (Equations and ).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…appendix 3, Compton, 1985, see Supporting Information), applies categorical descriptions linked to ranges of porosities (e.g. Scott et al, 2019; Ventres‐Pake et al, 2019), and is the sole surveyor of all jams in a single study.…”
Section: Review Of Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A common approach for estimating wood volume involves measuring the jam volume and then estimating the jam porosity, or fraction of void space ( Φ j ) versus filled space (1 − Φ j ), within the jam volume to determine the wood volume. Accurate knowledge of Φ j is also useful for assessing the impacts of jams on geomorphic and ecological processes, as jam porosity may be one of the most important measurable variables driving geomorphic change around jams (Manners et al, 2007; Dixon, 2016; Scott et al, 2019). Porosity can determine the degree to which jams alter stream channel hydraulics, with lower porosity resulting in greater backwater effects, erosion potential, and habitat creation, while higher porosity has less overall influence on local hydraulics and habitat (Manners et al, 2007; Dixon, 2016; Ventres‐Pake et al, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In particular, research on the turbulent flow patterns around engineered wood structures is limited. Studies on large wood have emphasized the ecological (see Scott, Wohl, & Yochum, 2019) and geomorphic (Gurnell, Piégay, Swanson, & Gregory, 2002) functions, force balances (D'Aoust & Millar, 2000;Shields & Alonso, 2012), transport (Mazzorana, Hübl, Zischg, & Largiader, 2011;Ruiz-Villanueva et al, 2014), and management (Wohl et al, 2016) of large wood. Although there is a general belief that wood restoration is ecologically beneficial (Roni, Beechie, Pess, & Hanson, 2014), it is unclear how much wood, or in what arrangement, is necessary to produce measurable benefits to fish habitat (Kail, Hering, Muhar, Gerhard, & Preis, 2007).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%