The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
PROCESS DOMAINS AND THE RIVER CONTINUUM 1
Abstract
ABSTRACT: The concept of process domains is proposed as an alternative to the River Continuum Concept for the influence of geomorphic processes on aquatic ecosystems. Broadly defined, the Process Domain Concept is a multi‐scale hypothesis that spatial variability in geomorphic processes governs temporal patterns of disturbances that influence ecosystem structure and dynamics. At a coarse scale, regional climate, geolog vegetation, and topography control the suite of geomorphic processes that are distributed over a landscape. Within the broad context so defined, stream channel classification can guide identification of functionally similar portions of a channel network, but the response of otherwise similar reaches can depend upon their geologic and geomorphic context. Within geomorphic provinces defined by differences in topography, climate history, and tectonic setting, areas with generally similar geology and topography define lithotopo units, which are useful for stratifying different suites of dominant geomorphic processes. Process domains are spatially identifiable areas characterized by distinct suites of geomorphic processes, and the Process Domain Concept implies that channel networks can be divided into discrete regions in which community structure and dynamics respond to distinctly different disturbance regimes. The concepts of process domains and lithotopo units provide both a framework for the application of patch dynamics concepts to complex landscapes and a context for addressing the effects of watershed processes on the ecology of mountain drainage basins.
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
Vannote, R. L., Minshall, G. W., Cummins, K. W., Sedell, J. R., & Cushing, C. E. (1980) · Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences · doi:10.1139/f80-017 · Cited by 9,984
BEVEN, K. J., & KIRKBY, M. J. (1979) · Hydrological Sciences Bulletin · doi:10.1080/02626667909491834 · Cited by 6,670
Cited by
Landscapes and Riverscapes: The Influence of Land Use on Stream Ecosystems
Allan, J. D. (2004) · Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics · doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.35.120202.110122 · Cited by 3,626
Tangled webs: reciprocal flows of invertebrate prey link streams and riparian zones
BAXTER, C. V., FAUSCH, K. D., & CARL SAUNDERS, W. (2005) · Freshwater Biology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2004.01328.x · Cited by 1,204
State of science: mental workload in ergonomics
Young, M. S., Brookhuis, K. A., Wickens, C. D., & Hancock, P. A. (2015) · Ergonomics · doi:10.1080/00140139.2014.956151 · Cited by 948
Understanding Processes and Downstream Linkages of Headwater Systems
GOMI, T., SIDLE, R. C., & RICHARDSON, J. S. (2002) · BioScience · doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0905:upadlo]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 841
Riparian Ecology and Management in the Pacific Coastal Rain Forest
NAIMAN, R. J., BILBY, R. E., & BISSON, P. A. (2000) · BioScience · doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2000)050[0996:reamit]2.0.co;2 · Cited by 359
Metadata
- Authors
- Montgomery, D. R.
- Venue
- JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1999-04
- Volume
- 35
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 397-410
- ISSN
- 1093-474X (ISSN-L)
- 1752-1688
- OpenAlex
- W2058927495
- Cited by
- 660
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 10.77
- 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: PROCESS DOMAINS AND THE RIVER CONTINUUM 1. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1999.tb03598.x
- The paper
- Montgomery, D. R. (1999). PROCESS DOMAINS AND THE RIVER CONTINUUM 1. JAWRA Journal of the American Water Resources Association. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-1688.1999.tb03598.x
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.