The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
River sensitivity: a lost foundation concept in fluvial geomorphology
Open accessAbstract
In the twenty‐first century, fluvial geomorphologists are ideally placed to use their science in an applied manner, and provide guidance on environmental issues of concern. Understanding the impact of floods and droughts, land use and climate change, water use, etc. on river forms, processes and evolution requires that we understand interactions between water, sediment and vegetation, and how climate and anthropogenic impacts shape those interactions. More frequently, fluvial geomorphologists are asked to provide answers to a range of river issues, make forecasts about how systems might adjust in the future, and work with managers to implement strategies on‐the‐ground. To some, the field of fluvial geomorphology is underprepared for this task as several principles of landscape form, process and evolution are yet to be fully explored. Others however, see that geomorphologists have a suite of principles and tools at their disposal, and sufficient understanding to make forecasts about future river adjustments with some level of confidence. One concept that has been lost in recent years, but should lie at the heart of such analyses is that of river sensitivity. In this paper I draw on foundation literature to review the concept of river sensitivity. I provide examples that demonstrate how this concept could be reshaped and used for analyses at landform, reach and catchment scales. At the landform scale, morphological sensitivity is a function of textural and geometric sensitivity. At the reach scale, analyses consider inherent behavioural and change sensitivity. At the catchment scale river response and recovery are a function of locational, transmission and filter sensitivity. I then discuss how some temporal concepts can be used to consider how sensitivity in itself adjusts over time. Finally, I discuss future challenges for analysis of river sensitivity and consider how it could be used to improve geomorphological forecasting for use in river management. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Novel ecosystems: implications for conservation and restoration
Hobbs, R. J., Higgs, E., & Harris, J. A. (2009) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2009.05.012 · Cited by 2,008
Cited by
Indices of sediment connectivity: opportunities, challenges and limitations
Heckmann, T., Cavalli, M., Cerdan, O., Foerster, S., Javaux, M., Lode, E., Smetanová, A., Vericat, D., & Brardinoni, F. (2018) · Earth-Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2018.08.004 · Cited by 425
Connectivity as an emergent property of geomorphic systems
Wohl, E., Brierley, G., Cadol, D., Coulthard, T. J., Covino, T., Fryirs, K. A., Grant, G., Hilton, R. G., Lane, S. N., Magilligan, F. J., et al. (2019) · Earth Surface Processes and Landforms · doi:10.1002/esp.4434 · Cited by 411
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Fryirs, K. A.
- Venue
- Earth Surface Processes and Landforms
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2016-04-22
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 55-70
- ISSN
- 0197-9337 (ISSN-L)
- 1096-9837
- OpenAlex
- W2302419716
- Cited by
- 247
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 16.75
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.