Precision of channel width and pool area measurements

9Citations
Citations of this article
13Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

The precision of width and pool area measurements has rarely been considered in relation to downstream or at section hydraulic geometry, fisheries studies, long-term or along a continuum research studies, or agency monitoring techniques. We assessed this precision and related it to other stream morphologic characteristics. Confidence limits (95 percent) around mean estimates with four transects (cross-sections perpendicular to the channel centerline) ranged from ±0.4 to 1.8 m on streams with a width of only 2.2 m. To avoid autocorrelation, transects should be spaced about three channel widths apart. To avoid stochastic inhomogeneity, reach length should be about 30 channel widths or ten transects to optimize sampling efficiency. Precision of width measurements decreased with decreased depth and increased with stream size. Both observations reflect variability caused by features such as boulders or coarse woody debris. Pool area precision increased with pool area reflecting increased precision for flat, wide streams with regular pool-riffle sequences. The least precision occurred on small, steep streams with random, boulder or coarse woody debris formed pools.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Myers, T. J., & Swanson, S. (1997). Precision of channel width and pool area measurements. Journal of the American Water Resources Association, 33(3), 647–659. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1997.tb03539.x

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free