CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 69Hydrology and Sediment Transport ProcessesFish Ecology and Management StudiesFreshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

What are we monitoring and why? Using geomorphic principles to frame eco-hydrological assessments of river condition

Brierley, Gary, Reid, Helen, Fryirs, Kirstie, Trahan, Nadine·2010·Science of The Total Environment
DOI 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.01.038
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Monitoring and assessment are integral components in adaptive management programmes that strive to improve the condition of river systems. Unfortunately, these procedures are generally applied with an emphasis upon biotic attributes and water quality, with limited regard for the geomorphic structure, function and evolutionary trajectory of a river system. Geomorphic principles convey an understanding of the landscape context within which ecohydrologic processes interact. Collectively, geo-eco-hydrologic understanding presents a coherent biophysical template that can be used to frame spatially and temporally rigorous approaches to monitoring that respect the inherent diversity, variability and complexity of any given river system. This understanding aids the development of management programmes that 'work with nature.' Unless an integrative perspective is used to monitor river condition, conservation and rehabilitation plans are unlikely to reach their true potential.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.01.038

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 70

  1. Allan, 2005, Nipped in the bud: why regional scale adaptive management is not blooming, Environ Manag, 36, 414, 10.1007/s00267-004-0244-1 · DOI
  2. Allan, 1997, Catchment-scale analysis of aquatic ecosystems, Freshw Biol, 37, 107, 10.1046/j.1365-2427.1997.00155.x · DOI
  3. Baron, 2002, Meeting ecological and societal needs for freshwater, Ecol Appl, 12, 1247, 10.1890/1051-0761(2002)012[1247:MEASNF]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  4. Beechie, 1999, An approach to restoring salmonid habitat-forming processes in Pacific Northwest watersheds, Fisheries, 24, 6, 10.1577/1548-8446(1999)024<0006:AATRSH>2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  5. Benda, 2004, The network dynamics hypothesis: how channel networks structure riverine habitat, Bioscience, 54, 413, 10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[0413:TNDHHC]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  6. Bernhardt, 2005, Ecology: synthesizing U.S. River Restoration Efforts, Science, 308, 636, 10.1126/science.1109769 · DOI · Paper page
  7. Bernhardt, 2007, Restoring rivers one reach at a time: results from a survey of U.S. river restoration practitioners, Restor Ecol, 15, 482, 10.1111/j.1526-100X.2007.00244.x · DOI
  8. Bohn, 2002, Establishing aquatic restoration priorities using a watershed approach, J Environ Manag, 64, 355, 10.1006/jema.2001.0496 · DOI
  9. Brierley, 2009, Don't fight the site: three geomorphic considerations in catchment scale river rehabilitation planning, Environ Manag, 43, 1201, 10.1007/s00267-008-9266-4 · DOI
  10. Buijse, 2002, Restoration strategies for river floodplains along large lowland rivers in Europe, Freshw Biol, 47, 889, 10.1046/j.1365-2427.2002.00915.x · DOI · Paper page
  11. Bun, 2002, Basic principles and ecological consequences of altered flow regimes for aquatic biodiversity, Environ Manag, 30, 492, 10.1007/s00267-002-2737-0 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Clarke, 2003, Linking form and function: towards an eco-hydromorphic approach to sustainable river restoration, Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst, 13, 439, 10.1002/aqc.591 · DOI
  13. Downs, 2002, Post-project appraisals in adaptive management of river channel restoration, Environ Manag, 29, 477, 10.1007/s00267-001-0035-X · DOI
  14. Frissell, 1986, A hierarchical framework for stream habitat classification: viewing streams in a watershed context, Environ Manag, 10, 199, 10.1007/BF01867358 · DOI
  15. Fryirs, 2003, Guiding principles for assessing geomorphic river condition: applications of a framework in the Bega catchment, South Coast, New South Wales, Australia, Catena, 53, 17, 10.1016/S0341-8162(02)00199-6 · DOI
  16. Fryirs, 2009, Naturalness and place in river rehabilitation, Ecol Soc, 14, 20, 10.5751/ES-02789-140120 · DOI
  17. Fryirs, 2007, Catchment-scale (dis)connectivity in sediment flux in the upper Hunter catchment, New South Wales, Australia, Geomorphology, 84, 297, 10.1016/j.geomorph.2006.01.044 · DOI
  18. Gregory, 2008, River recovery in an urban catchment: Twin Streams Catchment, Auckland, New Zealand, Physical Geography, 29, 222, 10.2747/0272-3646.29.3.222 · DOI
  19. Griffiths, 2002, The European Water Framework Directive: an approach to integrated river basin management, E-Water, 5, 1
  20. Gunderson, 1999, Resilience, flexibility and adaptive management — antidotes for spurious certitude?, Conserv Ecol, 3, 7, 10.5751/ES-00089-030107 · DOI
  21. Hildén, 2000, The role of integrating concepts in watershed rehabilitation, Ecosyst Health, 6, 39, 10.1046/j.1526-0992.2000.00004.x · DOI
  22. Hobbs, 2001, Restoration ecology: repairing the earth's ecosystem in the new millennium, Restor Ecol, 9, 239, 10.1046/j.1526-100x.2001.009002239.x · DOI · Paper page
  23. Hughes, 2005, Restoring riparian ecosystems: the challenge of accommodating variability and designing restoration trajectories, Ecol Soc, 10, 12, 10.5751/ES-01292-100112 · DOI
  24. Jansson, 2005, Stating mechanisms and refining criteria for ecologically successful river restoration: a comment on Palmer et al. (2005), J Appl Ecol, 42, 218, 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01022.x · DOI
  25. Jungwirth, 2002, Re-establishing and assessing ecological integrity in riverine landscapes, Freshw Biol, 47, 867, 10.1046/j.1365-2427.2002.00914.x · DOI
  26. Kallis, 2001, The EU water framework directive: measures and implications, Water Policy, 3, 125, 10.1016/S1366-7017(01)00007-1 · DOI
  27. Karr JR. Defining and measuring river health, Freshwater Biology 1999;41: 211,234. · DOI
  28. Karr, 2000, Sustaining living rivers, Hydrobiologia, 422–423, 1, 10.1023/A:1017097611303 · DOI
  29. Kondolf, 2006, Five elements for effective evaluation of stream restoration, Restor Ecol, 3, 133, 10.1111/j.1526-100X.1995.tb00086.x · DOI
  30. Kondolf, 2006, River restoration and meanders, Ecology and Society, 11, 42, 10.5751/ES-01795-110242 · DOI
  31. Kondolf, 1995, Evaluating stream restoration projects, Environ Manag, 19, 1, 10.1007/BF02471999 · DOI
  32. Kondolf, 2006, Process-based ecological river restoration: visualizing three-dimensional connectivity and dynamic vectors to recover lost linkages, Ecol Soc, 11, 5, 10.5751/ES-01747-110205 · DOI
  33. Lake, 2007, Linking ecological theory with stream restoration, Freshw Biol, 52, 597, 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2006.01709.x · DOI
  34. Lee, 1999, Appraising adaptive management, Conserv Ecol, 3, 3, 10.5751/ES-00131-030203 · DOI
  35. McLain, 1996, Adaptive management: promises and pitfalls, Environ Manag, 20, 437, 10.1007/BF01474647 · DOI · Paper page
  36. Michaelides, 2002, Modelling the effects of hillslope-channel coupling on catchment hydrological response, Earth Surf Processes Landf, 27, 1441, 10.1002/esp.440 · DOI
  37. Montgomery, 1999, Process domains and the river continuum, J Am Water Resour Assoc, 35, 397, 10.1111/j.1752-1688.1999.tb03598.x · DOI
  38. Montgomery, 2008, Geology: dreams of natural streams, Science, 319, 291, 10.1126/science.1153480 · DOI
  39. Newson, 2006, ‘Natural’ rivers, ‘ hydromorphological quality’ and river restoration: a challenging new agenda for applied fluvial geomorphology, Earth Surf Processes Landf, 31, 1606, 10.1002/esp.1430 · DOI
  40. Newson, 2000, Geomorphology, ecology and river channel habitat: mesoscale approaches to basin-scale challenges, Prog Phys Geogr, 24, 195, 10.1177/030913330002400203 · DOI
  41. Newson, 1998, A cost-effective approach for linking habitats, flow types and species requirements, Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst, 8, 431, 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0755(199807/08)8:4<431::AID-AQC302>3.0.CO;2-W · DOI
  42. Oberdorff, 2002, Development and validation of a fish-based index for the assessment of ‘river health’ in France, Freshw Biol, 47, 1720, 10.1046/j.1365-2427.2002.00884.x · DOI
  43. Ormerod, 2004, A golden age of river restoration science?, Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst, 14, 543, 10.1002/aqc.663 · DOI
  44. Orr, 2008, A predictive typology for characterising hydromorphology, Geomorphology, 100, 32, 10.1016/j.geomorph.2007.10.022 · DOI
  45. Pahl-Wostl, 2007, Transitions towards adaptive management of water facing climate and global change, Water Resour Manag, 21, 49, 10.1007/s11269-006-9040-4 · DOI
  46. Palmer, 2006, Hydroecology and river restoration: ripe for research and synthesis, Water Resour Res, 42, W03S07, 10.1029/2005WR004354 · DOI
  47. Palmer, 2005, Standards for ecologically successful river restoration, J Appl Ecol, 42, 208, 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01004.x · DOI · Paper page
  48. Paola, 2006, Toward a unified science of the Earth's surface: opportunities for synthesis among hydrology, geomorphology, geochemistry, and ecology, Water Resour Res, 42, W03S10, 10.1029/2005WR004336 · DOI
  49. Petts, 2006, Advancing science for water resources management, Hydrobiologia, 565, 277, 10.1007/s10750-005-1919-1 · DOI
  50. Poff, 1997, The natural flow regime: a new paradigm for river conservation and restoration, BioScience, 47, 769, 10.2307/1313099 · DOI · Paper page
  51. Poole, 2002, Fluvial landscape ecology: addressing uniqueness within the river discontinuum, Freshw Biol, 47, 641, 10.1046/j.1365-2427.2002.00922.x · DOI
  52. Reid, 2008, Measures of physical heterogeneity in appraisal of geomorphic river condition for urban streams: Twin Streams Catchment, Auckland, New Zealand, Phys Geogr, 29, 247, 10.2747/0272-3646.29.3.247 · DOI
  53. Rodriguez-Iturbe, 2009, River networks as ecological corridors: a complex systems perspective for integrating hydrologic, geomorphologic, and ecologic dynamics, Water Resour Res, 45, W01413, 10.1029/2008WR007124 · DOI
  54. Schmidt, 1998, Science and values in river restoration in the Grand Canyon, Bioscience, 48, 735, 10.2307/1313336 · DOI
  55. Sear, 2003, Environmental change in river channels: a neglected element. Towards geomorphological typologies, standards and monitoring, Sci Total Environ, 310, 17, 10.1016/S0048-9697(02)00619-8 · DOI
  56. Sear, 1995, Sediment-related river maintenance: the role of fluvial geomorphology, Earth Surf Processes Landf, 20, 629, 10.1002/esp.3290200706 · DOI
  57. Skinner, 2007, Strategic and project level river restoration protocols — key components of the Water Framework Directive (WFD), Water Environ J, 19, 35
  58. Stoddard, 2006, Setting expectation for the ecological condition of streams: the concept of reference condition, Ecol Appl, 16, 1267, 10.1890/1051-0761(2006)016[1267:SEFTEC]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  59. Thorp, 2006, The riverine ecosystem synthesis: biocomplexity in river networks across space and time, River Res Appl, 22, 123, 10.1002/rra.901 · DOI
  60. Vaughan, 2009, Integrating ecology with hydromorphology: a priority for river science and management, Aquat Conserv Mar Freshw Ecosyst, 19, 113, 10.1002/aqc.895 · DOI
  61. Walters, 1997, Challenges in adaptive management of riparian and coastal ecosystems, Conserv Ecol, 1, 1, 10.5751/ES-00026-010201 · DOI
  62. Ward, 1989, The four-dimensional nature of lotic ecosystems, J North Am Benthol Soc, 8, 2, 10.2307/1467397 · DOI
  63. Ward, 2001, Understanding the natural patterns and processes in river corridors as the basis for effective river restoration, Regul Rivers Res Manag, 17, 311, 10.1002/rrr.646 · DOI
  64. Ward, 2002, Riverine landscape diversity, Freshw Biol, 47, 517, 10.1046/j.1365-2427.2002.00893.x · DOI
  65. Whittier, 2007, Selecting reference sites for stream biological assessments: best professional judgment or objective criteria, J North Am Benthol Soc, 26, 349, 10.1899/0887-3593(2007)26[349:SRSFSB]2.0.CO;2 · DOI
  66. Wiens, 2002, Riverine landscapes: taking landscape ecology into the water, Freshw Biol, 47, 501, 10.1046/j.1365-2427.2002.00887.x · DOI
  67. Wissmar, 1998, Restoration and management of riparian ecosystems: a catchment perspective, Freshw Biol, 40, 571, 10.1046/j.1365-2427.1998.00383.x · DOI · Paper page
  68. Wohl, 2005, River restoration, Water Resour Res, 41, W10301, 10.1029/2005WR003985 · DOI
  69. Woolsey, 2007, A strategy to assess river restoration success, Freshw Biol, 52, 752, 10.1111/j.1365-2427.2007.01740.x · DOI
  70. Zalewski, 2000, Ecohydrology — the scientific background to use ecosystem properties as management tools toward sustainability of water resources, Ecol Eng, 16, 1, 10.1016/S0925-8574(00)00071-9 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Brierley, G., Reid, H., Fryirs, K., & Trahan, N.
Affiliations
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
  • Macquarie University (AU)
Corresponding author
Reid, Helen
ORCID
Venue
Science of The Total Environment
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-04
Volume
408
Issue
9
Pages
2025-2033
ISSN
0048-9697 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2010.01.038
OpenAlex
W1976592564
Cited by
69
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 4
FWCI
0.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • The Science of The Total Environment (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Earth and Planetary Sciences › Earth-Surface Processes › Hydrology and Sediment Transport Processes
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Fish Ecology and Management Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Freshwater macroinvertebrate diversity and ecology
Keywords
ecohydrology, fluvial geomorphology, adaptive management, river restoration, river conservation, landscape context
MeSH terms
Conservation of Natural Resources, Environment, Environmental Monitoring, Geography, Water Pollutants, Chemical, Ecosystem, Waste Management, Rivers

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