Predicting passive dispersal using particle hitting distance estimates in the near field in rivers

IF 3.5 1区 地球科学 Q1 LIMNOLOGY
C. R. Farrow, A. Jabbari, J. D. Ackerman
{"title":"Predicting passive dispersal using particle hitting distance estimates in the near field in rivers","authors":"C. R. Farrow, A. Jabbari, J. D. Ackerman","doi":"10.1002/lno.70479","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Particles, including biologically relevant ones, released in rivers may interact with the bed multiple times throughout their dispersal downstream. Passive dispersal is influenced by local variations in bed morphometry and hydrodynamics, especially in the near field—the area downstream of a point source where complete mixing across the river's width has not yet occurred. We examined predictors (e.g., depth [], shear velocity [], velocity at 50% ) of the distance at which particles first contact the bed (hitting distance) using a theoretical model of turbulent transport. We identified as the strongest predictor of hitting distance and tested how different estimates of affected model predictions. We aimed to determine whether increased sampling effort (e.g., multiple estimates in a reach) improves the accuracy of the model. Specifically, we compared a reach‐based derived from the depth–slope product (DSP) vs. local estimates based on velocity measurements at 50% <jats:italic>H</jats:italic> , calculated using the turbulent kinetic energy method. We evaluated predictions against empirical data from three river reaches (Conestogo, Grand, and Speed rivers) with different hydrodynamic conditions (e.g., <jats:italic>H</jats:italic> &lt; 50 cm; 2 &lt; &lt; 5 cm s <jats:sup>−1</jats:sup> ). Model predictions based on reach‐averaged or single values (RMSE <jats:sub>local</jats:sub> = 2–3 m) were more accurate than DSP‐derived estimates (RMSE <jats:sub>DSP</jats:sub> = 3–7 m) and an implementation that accounts for longitudinal variations in local (RMSE <jats:sub>modelled</jats:sub> = 1–8 m). Our results suggest that accounting for variations in bed morphometry and hydrodynamics improves predictions of particle transport and dispersal at reach scales.","PeriodicalId":18143,"journal":{"name":"Limnology and Oceanography","volume":"2 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2026-08-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Limnology and Oceanography","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/lno.70479","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LIMNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Particles, including biologically relevant ones, released in rivers may interact with the bed multiple times throughout their dispersal downstream. Passive dispersal is influenced by local variations in bed morphometry and hydrodynamics, especially in the near field—the area downstream of a point source where complete mixing across the river's width has not yet occurred. We examined predictors (e.g., depth [], shear velocity [], velocity at 50% ) of the distance at which particles first contact the bed (hitting distance) using a theoretical model of turbulent transport. We identified as the strongest predictor of hitting distance and tested how different estimates of affected model predictions. We aimed to determine whether increased sampling effort (e.g., multiple estimates in a reach) improves the accuracy of the model. Specifically, we compared a reach‐based derived from the depth–slope product (DSP) vs. local estimates based on velocity measurements at 50% H , calculated using the turbulent kinetic energy method. We evaluated predictions against empirical data from three river reaches (Conestogo, Grand, and Speed rivers) with different hydrodynamic conditions (e.g., H < 50 cm; 2 < < 5 cm s −1 ). Model predictions based on reach‐averaged or single values (RMSE local = 2–3 m) were more accurate than DSP‐derived estimates (RMSE DSP = 3–7 m) and an implementation that accounts for longitudinal variations in local (RMSE modelled = 1–8 m). Our results suggest that accounting for variations in bed morphometry and hydrodynamics improves predictions of particle transport and dispersal at reach scales.
利用河流近场粒子撞击距离预测被动扩散
在河流中释放的颗粒,包括与生物相关的颗粒,在向下游扩散的过程中可能多次与河床相互作用。被动扩散受到河床形态和水动力的局部变化的影响,特别是在近场,即点源下游尚未发生跨河宽度完全混合的区域。我们使用紊流输运的理论模型检验了粒子首次接触床层(撞击距离)的距离的预测因子(如深度[]、剪切速度[]、50%时的速度)。我们确定了击球距离的最强预测器,并测试了不同的估计如何影响模型预测。我们的目的是确定增加的采样努力(例如,在一个范围内的多个估计)是否提高了模型的准确性。具体来说,我们比较了基于深度斜率积(DSP)的到达量与基于50% H下速度测量的局部估计,使用湍流动能方法计算。我们根据不同水动力条件(例如,H < 50 cm; 2 < < 5 cm s - 1)的三条河流(Conestogo河、Grand河和Speed河)的经验数据评估了预测结果。基于到达平均或单一值(RMSE局部= 2-3米)的模型预测比DSP衍生的估计(RMSE DSP = 3-7米)和考虑局部纵向变化(RMSE建模= 1-8米)的实现更准确。我们的研究结果表明,考虑到河床形态和流体动力学的变化,可以改善河段尺度上粒子输运和扩散的预测。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Limnology and Oceanography
Limnology and Oceanography 地学-海洋学
CiteScore
8.80
自引率
6.70%
发文量
254
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Limnology and Oceanography (L&O; print ISSN 0024-3590, online ISSN 1939-5590) publishes original articles, including scholarly reviews, about all aspects of limnology and oceanography. The journal''s unifying theme is the understanding of aquatic systems. Submissions are judged on the originality of their data, interpretations, and ideas, and on the degree to which they can be generalized beyond the particular aquatic system examined. Laboratory and modeling studies must demonstrate relevance to field environments; typically this means that they are bolstered by substantial "real-world" data. Few purely theoretical or purely empirical papers are accepted for review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书