The main regularities of the ratio between riverbed and basin components of erosion and suspended sediment yield in river basins of the USA

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Open Access Open Access
Restricted Access Access granted
Restricted Access Subscription Access

Abstract

Suspended sediment yield is one of the objective and sufficiently accurate measures of erosion intensity in river basins. In first approximation, it can be divided into the riverbed component –r(rb), the products of vertical and horizontal riverbed deformations), and basin component – r(bas), the products of soil and gully erosion. An attempt was made to distinguish this erosion structure in the USA river basins based on the partition of suspended sediments of 224 rivers (based on the data from the US Geological Service on the average monthly water discharges and suspended sediment yields) according to the method proposed by one of the authors of the paper, as well as an assessment of its factor dependence.

The average r(rb) value for the analyzed rivers of the USA is 7.9±1.1%: for lowland rivers – 10.6±1.7%, for low-mountain (including uplands) rivers – 5.7±1.5%, for mid-mountain rivers – 4.3±1.5%. The geomorphic factor, landscape and climatic conditions within the river basins have a major impact on the suspended sediments flux ratio r(rb)/r(bas). Thus, in the USA plains, the largest average r(rb) portion is in the forest landscapes (taiga, mixed and broadleaf forests of the temperate zone, subtropical forests) – 10–15%. On the contrary, in the arid landscapes (semi-deserts) this value does not exceed 1%. Within these general trends, there are quite strong variations in the r(rb)/r(bas) ratios due to the changes in high river basin areas, agricultural activities and lithologic composition of the riverbed and floodplain sediments. There is an inverse hyperbolic relationship between the actual suspended sediment yield of rivers and the riverbed sediment portion (r(rb)), which is most manifested in the plains and low-mountains of the USA. It is also shown that a composition of the river basin parent (surficial) rocks does not play a significant role in the variability of the r(rb)/r(bas) at this scale of the study. A comparison of the r(rb)/r(bas)-estimates and their factor dependence on the US rivers with the rivers of Northern Eurasia (the territory of the former Soviet Union) makes it possible to reveal good convergence of the results obtained in these parts of the Earth, and to suggest the universal nature of the revealed regularities (in total for 684 river basins) for the whole temperate (partly for subtropical and tropical) zone of the Northern hemisphere of our planet.

Full Text

Restricted Access

About the authors

A. V. Gusarov

Kazan Federal University

Author for correspondence.
Email: avgusarov@mail.ru
Russian Federation, Kazan

L. F. Maksyutova

Kazan Federal University

Email: avgusarov@mail.ru
Russian Federation, Kazan

References

  1. Kopaliani Z.D. About the relation between the bedload and suspended sediments of rivers, in Gidrofizicheskiye protsessy v rekah i vodohranilishah (Hydrophysical processes in rivers and reservoirs). Moscow: Nauka (Publ.), 1985. P. 143–147.
  2. Chalov R.S. Ruslovedeniye: teoria, geografia, praktika. Tom 1: Ruslovye processy: faktory, mekhanizmy, formy proyavleniya i usloviya formirovaniya rechnih rusel (Riverbed science: theory, geography, practice. Vol. 1: Riverbed processes, mechanism, forms of manifistations and conditions of formations of riverbeds). Moscow: LKI (Publ.), 2008. 608 p.
  3. Dedkov A.P. and Mozzherin V.I. Eroziya i stok nanosov na Zemle (Erosion and sediment yield on the Earth). Kazan: KGU (Publ.), 1984. 264 p.
  4. Meade R.H. Sources sinks, and storage of river sediment in Atlantic drainage of the United States. Journal of Geology. 1982. Vol. 90. No. 3. P. 235–252.
  5. Phillips J.D. Fluvial sediment budgets in the North Carolina Piedmont. Geomorphology. 1991. No. 4. P. 231–241.
  6. Williams D. Tillage as a conservation tool. Amer. Soc. Agr. Engineers. 1967. No. 70. P. 56–57.
  7. US Census of Agriculture. Washington: US Department of Agriculture. 1982. Vol. 1. 434 p.
  8. Natural Resources Conservation Service / Summary Report. 1997. National Resource Invento-ry, Washington, 2000.
  9. Renwick W.H., Smith S.V., Bartley J.D., and Buddemeier R.W. The role of impoundments in the sediment budget of the conterminous United States. Geomorphology. 2005. No. 71. P. 99–111.
  10. Lvovitch M.I., Karasik G.Y., Bratseva N.P., Medvedeva G.P., and Meleshko A.V. Sovremenna-ya intensivnost' vnutrikontinental'noy erozii sushi zemnogo shara. Rezul'taty issledovaniy po mezhdunarodnym geofizicheskim proektam (Modern inland erosion intensity of the Earth’s dry land. The results of studies on the international geophysical projects). Moscow: Mezhved. Geofiz. Komitet (Publ.), 1991. 336 p.
  11. Ewing R. Postfire suspended sediment from Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. Water Re-sources Bulletin. 1996. Vol. 32. Iss. 3. P. 605–627.
  12. Langlois J.L., Johnson D.W., and Mehuys G.R. Suspended sediment dynamics associated with snowmelt runoff in a small mountain stream of Lake Tahoe (Nevada). Hydrological Processes. 2005. Vol. 19. Iss. 18. P. 3569–3580. doi: 10.1002/hyp.5844.
  13. Allmendinger N.E., Pizzuto J.E., Moglen G.E., and Lewicki M. A sediment budget for an urban-izing watershed, 1951–1996, Montgomery County, Maryland, U.S.A. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. 2007. Vol. 43. Iss. 6. P. 1483–1498. doi: 10.1111/j.1752-1688.2007.00122.x.
  14. Juracek K.E. and Ziegler A.C. Estimation of sediment sources using selected chemical tracers in the Perry Lake basin, Kansas, USA. International Journal of Sediment Research. 2009. Vol. 24. Iss. 1. March 2009. P. 108–125.
  15. Schenk E.R. and Hupp C.R. Legacy effects on colonial millponds on floodplain sedimentation, bank erosion, and channel morphology, Mid-Atlantic, USA. Journal of the American Water Re-sources Association. 2009. Vol. 45. Iss. 3. June 2009. P. 597–606.
  16. Ritchie J.C., Nearing M.A., and Rhoton F.E. Sediment budget and sources determinations using fallout Cesium-137 in a semiarid rangeland watershed, Arizona, USA. Journal of Environmen-tal Radioactivity. 2009. Vol. 100. Iss. 8. August 2009. P. 637–643.
  17. Devereux O.H., Prestegaard K.L., Needelman B.A., and Gellis A.C. Suspended sediment sources in an urban watershed, Northeast Branch Anacostia River, Maryland. Hydrological Processes. 2010. Vol. 24. Iss. 11. May 2010. P. 1391–1403.
  18. Mukundan R., Radcliffe D.E. and Ritchie J.C. Channel stability and sediment source assess-ment in streams draining a Piedmont watershed in Georgia, USA. Hydrological Processes. 2011. Vol. 25. Iss. 8. April 2011. P. 1243–1253.
  19. Schilling K.E., Isenhart T.M., Palmer J.A., Wolter C.F., and Spooner J. Impact of Land-Cover Change on Suspended Sediment Transport in Two Agricultural Watersheds. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. 2011. Vol. 47. Iss. 4. August 2011. P. 672–686.
  20. Tufekcioglu M., Isenhart T.M., Schultz R.C., Bear D.A., Kovar J.L., Russell J.R. Sream bank erosion as a source of sediment and phosphorus in grazed pastures of the Rathbun Lake Water-shed in southern Iowa, United States. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation. 2012. Vol. 67. Iss. 6. November 2012. P. 545–555.
  21. Mukundan R., Pradhanang S.M., Schneiderman E.M., Pierson D.C., Anandhi A., Zion M.S., Matonse A.H., Lounsbury D.G., and Steenhuis T.S. Suspended sediment source areas and fu-ture climate impact on soil erosion and sediment yield in a New York City water supply water-shed, USA. Geomorphology. 2013. Vol. 183. 1 February 2013. P. 110–119.
  22. Gao P., Nearing M.A., Commons M. Suspended sediment transport at the instantaneous and event time scales in semiarid watersheds of southeastern Arizona, USA. Water Resources Re-search. 2013. Vol. 49. Iss. 10. October 2013. P. 6857–6870.
  23. McKee L.J., Lewicki M., Schoellhamer D.H., and Ganju N.K. Comparison of sediment supply to San Francisco Bay from watersheds draining the Bay Area and the Central Valley of Califor-nia. Marine Geology. 2013. Vol. 345. 1 November 2013. P. 47–62.
  24. Warrick J.A., Melack J.M., and Goodbridge B.M. Sediment yields from small, steep coastal wa-tersheds of California. Journal of Hydrology: Regional Studies. 2015. Vol. 4. September 01. P. 516–534.
  25. Odgaard A.J. Bank erosion contribution to stream sediment load. IIHR Report (Iowa Institute of Hydraulic Research). 1984. Iss. 280. August 1984. 92 p.
  26. Fraley L.M., Miller A.J., and Welty C. Contribution of in-channel processes to sediment yield of an urbanizing watershed. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. 2009. Vol. 45. Iss. 3. June 2009. P. 748–766.
  27. Gellis A.C. and Noe G.B. Sediment source analysis in the Linganore Creek watershed, Mary-land, USA, using the sediment fingerprinting approach: 2008 to 2010. Journal of Soils and Sed-iments. Vol. 13. Iss. 10. December 2013. P. 1735–1753.
  28. U.S. Geological Survey – https://www.usgs.gov
  29. Gusarov A.V. Minimum length of suspended sediment yield time-series for a proper estima-tion of spatio-temporal variability of erosion rates in river basins. Geomorfologiya (Geomor-phology RAS). 2017. No. 1. P. 19–29 (in Russ.). doi: 10.15356/0435-4281-2017-1-19-29.
  30. Gusarov A.V. Riverbed and basin components of erosion and suspended sediments runoff within river basins: A new method of assessment. Geomorfologiya (Geomorphology RAS). 2013. No. 2. P. 23–38 (in Russ.). doi: 10.15356/0435-4281-2013-2-23-38.
  31. Gusarov A.V. The main regularities of the ratio between riverbed and basin components of ero-sion and suspended sediment flux in the Northern Eurasia’s river basins. Geomorfologiya (Ge-omorphology RAS). 2015. No. 4. P. 3–20 (in Russ.). doi: 10.15356/0435-4281-2015-4-3-20.
  32. Ruslovoy rezhim rek Severnoy Evrazii (v predelah byvshego SSSR) (Riverbed regime of the Northern Eurasia’s rivers (within the territory of the former USSR). R.S. Chalov. Ed. Moscow: MGU (Publ.), 1994. 336 p.
  33. Gray L.S. History of Agriculture in the Southern United States to 1860. Glochester: Peter Smith, 1958. 1086 p.
  34. Nicks A.D., Lane L.J., Gander G.A., and Manetsch C. Regional analysis of precipitation and temperature trends using gridded climate station data. Advances of Hydro-Science & Engineer-ing. The University of Mississippi, 1985. Vol. 1. Part 1. P. 497–502.
  35. Trimble S.W. Man-induced soil erosion on the Southern Piedmont, 1700–1970. Ankeny, Iowa, Soil Conservation Society of America, 1974. 180 p.
  36. Simon A. and Darby S.E. Disturbance, channel evolution and erosion rates: Hotophia Creek, Mississippi. Management of Landscapes Disturbed by Channel Incision. The Centre for Com-putational Hydroscience and Engineering. The University of Mississippi, 1997. P. 476–481.

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download
2. Fig. 1. Map of the location of the analyzed hydrological stations (posts) of the US Geological Survey network on the rivers of the country (without Alaska; with Puerto Rico)

Download (519KB)
Indexing metadata
3. Fig. 2. Distribution of the basins of the analyzed rivers of the USA (N, units) by natural (landscape) zones on the plains and altitude zones in the mountains

Download (1015KB)
Indexing metadata
4. Fig. 3. The riverbed and basin components in the suspended suspension of rivers (streams) General Creek / Mix Bay (General Creek / Meeks Bay, California) and Ward Creek / Tahoe Pines, California, USA ( hereinafter used photos from free electronic access)

Download (3MB)
Indexing metadata
5. Fig. 4. The riverbed and basin constituents in the suspended sediment load of the Green River / Green River (Green River / Green River, pc. Wyoming) and Kootenai River / Copeland, Idaho, USA.

Download (3MB)
Indexing metadata
6. Fig. 5. The channel and basin components in the suspended sediment load in the river. Missouri near Sioux (Missouri River at Sioux City, Iowa), USA.Fig. 5. The channel and basin components in the suspended sediment load in the river. Missouri near Sioux (Missouri River at Sioux City, Iowa), USA.

Download (1MB)
Indexing metadata
7. Fig. 6. Distribution of the average share of the channel component in the flow of suspended sediment (rrus (%), bar graph) and the exponent n of the equation (2) of the US rivers by natural (landscape) zones on the plains and altitudes in the mountains (see Fig. 2)

Download (1MB)
Indexing metadata
8. Fig. 7. The relationship between the modular values of the total suspended sediment flow (M (R), t / km2 × year) and the share of sediment of channel origin (rus,%) of US rivers

Download (2MB)
Indexing metadata
9. Fig. 8. Relationship between the coefficients of the intra-annual variation in the average monthly values of river water flow (Cv (Q),%), suspended sediment discharge (Cv (R),%) and the proportion of channel suspended sediments (rus,%) in the height groups of the analyzed river basins in the USA

Download (2MB)
Indexing metadata

Copyright (c) 2019 Russian Academy of Sciences