The DOI matches its Crossref record.
The distribution and strength of riparian tree roots in relation to riverbank reinforcement
Abstract
The main influences of plants on the mass stability of riverbanks are those that affect the strength of bank sediments. Plants enhance bank strength by reducing pore‐water pressures and by directly reinforcing bank material with their roots. In this paper we do not consider bank hydrology but focus on quantifying increases in sediment strength due to root reinforcement. Root reinforcement is a function of root strength, interface friction between the roots and the soil, and the distribution of roots within the soil. Field and laboratory studies of Australian riparian trees, river red gum (Eucalyptus camaldulensis) and swamp paperbark (Melaleuca ericifolia), indicate that bank reinforcement, due to the roots of these species, decreases exponentially with depth below the soil surface and distance away from the trees. Differences in the spatial distribution of root reinforcement are illustrated by a comparison of the apparent cohesion due to roots (cr) with the effective cohesion of the saturated bank material (15 kPa). Directly below the river red gum, root reinforcement is equal to effective cohesion at 1·7 m depth. At the dripline (17 m from the trunk), root reinforcement is equal to material strength at 0·4 m depth. For the swamp paperbark, cr=15 kPa at 1·1 m depth beneath surface, at the trunks, and at 0·4 m depth at the dripline (2·5 m from the trunk). A description of the spatial distribution of root reinforcement is important in the riverbank context. We find that interspecies differences in the strength of living roots have less significance for bank reinforcement than interspecies differences in root distribution. Copyright © 2001 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
Cited by
Quantifying the mechanical and hydrologic effects of riparian vegetation on streambank stability
Simon, A., & Collison, A. J. C. (2002) · Earth Surface Processes and Landforms · doi:10.1002/esp.325 · Cited by 844
Corenblit, D., Tabacchi, E., Steiger, J., & Gurnell, A. M. (2007) · Earth-Science Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.earscirev.2007.05.004 · Cited by 721
De Baets, S., Poesen, J., Reubens, B., Wemans, K., De Baerdemaeker, J., & Muys, B. (2008) · Plant and Soil · doi:10.1007/s11104-008-9553-0 · Cited by 516
Gravel-Bed Rivers VI: From Process Understanding to River Restoration
(2007) · Developments in Earth Surface Processes · doi:10.1016/s0928-2025(07)x1100-3 · Cited by 362
Quantifying lateral root reinforcement in steep slopes – from a bundle of roots to tree stands
Schwarz, M., Lehmann, P., & Or, D. (2010) · Earth Surface Processes and Landforms · doi:10.1002/esp.1927 · Cited by 288
Metadata
- Authors
- Abernethy, B., & Rutherfurd, I. D.
- Venue
- Hydrological Processes
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-01
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 63-79
- ISSN
- 0885-6087 (ISSN-L)
- 1099-1085
- OpenAlex
- W1971970028
- Cited by
- 399
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 19.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The distribution and strength of riparian tree roots in relation to riverbank reinforcement. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/hyp.152
- The paper
- Abernethy, B., & Rutherfurd, I. D. (2001). The distribution and strength of riparian tree roots in relation to riverbank reinforcement. Hydrological Processes. https://doi.org/10.1002/hyp.152
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.