1656

Intensity and characteristic length of braided

channel patterns1
Peter Ashmore

Abstract: Recent research on braided river morphology shows that the intensity (number of anabranches) of braiding
channels increases with dimensionless discharge and (or) stream power. This variation in intensity reflects the adjustment
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by EPFL BIBLIOTHEQUE USD on 12/02/20

of total sinuosity of the river to imposed gradient at a given discharge and grain size. Only a subset of channels is active
at a given time and this active braiding intensity reflects the limited number of channels that can sustain bed load transport
as the flow is divided. This is governed mechanistically by the dynamics of bifurcations and avulsions. Braided channel
networks also have a characteristic length scale (or scales) related to the wavelength of the bars from which braiding de-
velops and to the scale of the bars and confluence–bifurcation units within the braided network. The range of scales is lim-
ited by the size (and, therefore, number) of the active channels within the network and the width of the entire river.
Key words: river regime, braiding, fluvial geomorphology, river mechanics, sediment transport, bars, bifurcation, channel
pattern.
Résumé : Les recherches récentes sur la morphologie des rivières anastomosées montrent que l’intensité (le nombre de
bras de la rivière anastomosée) des petits chenaux entrelacés augmente avec la décharge adimensionnelle et/ou la force du
ruisseau. Cette variation d’intensité reflète l’ajustement de la sinuosité totale de la rivière à un gradient imposé pour une
décharge et une granulométrie données. Seul un sous-ensemble de canaux est actif à tout moment donné et cette intensité
de chenaux entrelacés actifs reflète le nombre limité de canaux qui peuvent soutenir le transport de la charge de fond
lorsque l’écoulement est divisé. Ce nombre limité est régi de manière mécaniste par la dynamique des embranchements et
For personal use only.

des avulsions. Les réseaux de canaux anastomosés possèdent aussi une ou plusieurs échelles de longueur caractéristiques
reliées à la longueur d’onde des barres à partir desquelles se développe le réseau anastomosé ainsi qu’à l’échelle des barres
et au nombre de confluences-embranchements dans le réseau de canaux anastomosés. La plage d’échelles est limitée par la
dimension (et, donc, le nombre) des canaux actifs dans le réseau et par la largeur entière de la rivière.
Mots-clés : régime d’écoulement, développement d’un réseau anastomosé, géomorphologie fluviale, mécanique des riviè-
res, transport de sédiments, barres, embranchements, forme de canaux.
[Traduit par la Rédaction]

1. Introduction mon in mountain and piedmont environments, alluvial

Braided rivers are a distinctive alluvial river morphology
characterized by multiple intersecting channels separated by
ephemeral (and usually unvegetated) exposed bars (Fig. 1).
Braiding is a ‘‘self-induced form’’ (Yalin 1992) and an ac-
tive, ongoing set of processes in the river that is a response,
ultimately, to the prevailing discharge, valley gradient, and
sediment flux (quantity and particle size). The channel con-
figuration is extremely unstable and characterized by rapid
and abrupt morphological changes, channel avulsion, and
bar formation or destruction during periods of high flow.
Braiding occurs in noncohesive sand and gravel and is com-
Received 7 January 2009. Revision accepted 27 May 2009.
Published on the NRC Research Press Web site at cjce.nrc.ca on
5 November 2009.
P. Ashmore. Department of Geography, University of Western
Ontario, London, ON N6A 5C2, Canada
(email:pashmore@uwo.ca).
Written discussion of this article is welcomed and will be
received by the Editor until 28 February 2010.
1This paper is one of a selection of papers in this Special Issue
in honour of Professor M. Selim Yalin (1925–2007).
plains, and glaciated regions with high rates of supply of
coarse-grained sediment to the river system. For engineering
and applied geomorphology, an understanding of braided
river morphology and dynamics is needed to effectively an-
ticipate the consequences of human interference (e.g., flow
regime manipulation, river training, encroachment on the
channel zone, and gravel extraction) and response to envi-
ronmental change (Galay et al. 1998). Increasingly, stream
channel restoration and natural channel design, and the im-
plications of channel pattern change for fluvial habitat and
river ecology, require understanding of fluvial morphody-
namics, including that of braided rivers.
Much analysis of braided channel patterns has focused on
the threshold conditions for the onset of braiding in compar-
ison to that for single channel rivers (Ferguson 1987) and on
the fundamental unit processes and morphology of braided
rivers (e.g., channel confluence dynamics, bar formation
and accretion, development of bifurcations) (see Ferguson
1993). Much less attention has been paid to the larger scale
characteristics and development of the braided channel net-
work as a regime property of braided rivers and the relation
of this larger scale morphology to the unit channel and bar
processes (Ashmore 2001). This paper synthesizes and de-
velops ideas and recent analyses of two aspects of gravel-

Can. J. Civ. Eng. 36: 1656–1666 (2009) doi:10.1139/L09-088 Published by NRC Research Press
 Ashmore
Fig. 1. Gravel-bed braided river (Sunwapta River, Alberta). Flow is right to left and the river is approximately 100 m wide. Note the reg-
ularity in spacing of channel confluence bifurcations in the main channel closer to the camera.
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by EPFL BIBLIOTHEQUE USD on 12/02/20
bed braided rivers – the intensity (complexity) of braiding
patterns and the characteristic length scale of braided chan-
nel patterns – and shows the connection between them that
reveals new, and fundamental, aspects of the morphodynam-
ics of braided channels.
For personal use only.
2. Limits to braiding
2.1 Regime concepts of braiding intensity
River channels have a predictable morphology that is in
equilibrium with the prevailing water discharge, sediment
supply, and topographic (valley) gradient (see Parker et al.
2007 for a recent analysis). In fluvial geomorphology, these
equilibrium relationships are usually called ‘‘hydraulic ge-
ometry’’, whereas in engineering this adjustment has usually
been referred to as ‘‘river regime’’ (Blench 1969). The es-
tablished regime relationships for natural channels that pre-
dict, for example, equilibrium channel width for the
imposed water discharge and bed sediment size, have been
developed almost exclusively for single channel (often
meandered) rivers. Braided rivers, with their multiple chan-
nels and extensive lateral migration, give the superficial ap-
pearance of being free of these equilibrium regime
constraints. In fact, braided rivers have limits to their overall
dimensions, such as channel width (Ashmore 2001), and
also the complexity of channel pattern, in the same manner
as single channel rivers. What is the nature of this regime
adjustment of braiding channel patterns and how does it oc-
cur?
The complexity of a braided channel network is usually
referred to as ‘‘braiding intensity’’. A number of different
measurement indices of braiding intensity have been used in
fluvial geomorphology in the past 50 years. Most of these
are some variation of either the average number of channels
across the braided river along a defined river length
(channel count indices) or the total length of channels per
unit river length (total sinuosity indices) (Egozi and Ash-
more 2008). Their purpose is to provide a simple, relative
measure of the extent or complexity of braiding for inter-
comparison of rivers and for analysis and explanation of
spatial or temporal changes in channel pattern. Measurement
1657
of these indices in a range of experimental conditions using
physical models, and on braided rivers in nature, shows that
braided rivers vary considerably in their braiding intensity
and therefore there is a continuum of braided river pattern
morphology, as there is of river pattern morphology in gen-
eral (Ferguson 1987). Many of these indices are actually
closely equivalent (Egozi and Ashmore 2008) and this paper
mostly refers generically to braiding intensity or braiding in-
dex (see Table 1 for a summary of terminology).
The conditions for the development of braided channels
have been subject to considerable analysis over the past
50 years or more, using a variety of observational, experi-
mental, and theoretical approaches (Bridge 1993). Explana-
tions have tended to focus on channel or bar-scale
morphodynamics or on larger scale external controls on the
river regime. At channel-scale there is general agreement
that one important control is the width-depth ratio (aspect
ratio) of the river cross section (where width is the bank-to-
bank wetted width of the initial single channel), for which a
larger value tends to lead to a greater tendency for braiding.
In channels with significant bedload (sand or gravel), prom-
inent and regularly spaced depositional bars form with
sharp, downstream margins and associated upstream scour
pools from where the bar material is eroded (Fig. 2). These
are sometimes referred to as pool-bar units. The number of
bars across the channels is referred to as the mode (Fig. 2).
Some have argued that braiding occurs in wide channels be-
cause rather than a single row of (alternate) bars (mode 1)
formed in narrow channels, two (mode 2) or more rows oc-
cur that develop into bars in the centre of the channel
around which the braided channel develops (Yalin 1992)
(Fig. 2). Others propose that braiding can develop by the
widening of an initial alternate bar channel, which allows
chute cutoff of the initial bends, from which braiding propa-
gates (Ashmore 1991b; Ferguson 1993). Widening is then
influenced by other channel characteristics, especially bank
resistance (Ferguson 1987), with the consequence that braid-
ing may be the ‘default’ channel pattern for alluvial rivers
unless there is a restriction on channel widening due to
bank resistance related to bank material internal strength
and riparian vegetation (Murray and Paola 1994). The bar-
Published by NRC Research Press
 1658
Table 1. Common terminology used in describing braided river morphology.
Braiding intensity
Braiding index
Active braiding intensity
Active braiding index
Characteristic length
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by EPFL BIBLIOTHEQUE USD on 12/02/20
Fig. 2. Bar unit morphology, wavelength, and width (B) in initial
straight channels of low (alternate bar) and high (central bar) width
to depth ratio. Based on diagrams by Ikeda (1984) and Yalin
(1992).
For personal use only.
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 36, 2009
Generic term of the complexity of the braided channel network
A defined measurement of braiding intensity. Two are commonly used: (1) The
average number of channels across transects a river reach (2) The total length of
channels per unit river length (sometimes called ‘‘total sinuosity’’).
Complexity and associated measurement of only those channels in the braided river
that are transporting bed load and involved in morphological development of the
river bed. (Inactive channels have flow, but no bedload).
Generic term for the dominant length scale of channel and planform morphology.
For example, wavelength of bars or along-channel spacing of confluences and bi-
furcations in a braided river
scale origins of braiding, and the consequences for channel
pattern morphology, are discussed further in the second part
of this paper.
Explanations of braiding based on regime analysis focus
on the influence of channel (or valley) gradient or upstream
sediment flux (which, it has been argued, is ultimately the
control on channel gradient at a given discharge (Paola
2001)). Early empirical evidence (Leopold and Wolman
1957) pointed to the generally higher gradient of braided
streams for a given discharge and to the effect of valley gra-
dient on the sinuosity of river channels in general (Richards
1982). One approach to the explanation of this effect of gra-
dient on channel pattern is to consider meandering and
braiding as different modes of adjustment to the imposed
valley gradient (Bettess and White 1983; Ferguson 1987;
Yalin 1992). Assuming that both meandering and braiding
channels begin with a straight channel with gradient in ex-
cess of the (conceptual) stable regime state, Yalin (1992) ar-
gued that meandering is characterized by a reduction of
channel gradient (via increased sinuosity of one channel) to
reach the regime slope, whereas braiding is characterized by
progressive channel subdivision, which effectively increases
the regime channel slope (because regime gradient is inver-
sely related to channel discharge and the discharge of each
anabranch is less than that of the initial undivided channel)
until it is equal to the initial valley gradient. The conse-
quence is that braided rivers have steeper slopes than mean-
ders for the same discharge and bed material grain size. It
should be pointed out that braided anabranches have some
(usually low) sinuosity, so that at least part of the braiding
adjustment is also via slope reduction. Bettess and White
(1983) suggest that braiding is likely when, initially, valley
gradient is at least two times the regime slope and that
braiding may only be stable in the longer term for valley
gradient approximately three times the regime channel
slope. Yalin (1992) suggests instead that the ‘choice’ of
braiding over meandering goes back to channel geometry
(initial channel width or width:depth ratio) and the occur-
rence of single row (meandering) or multiple row (braiding)
bars, which is, in turn, partly a function of initial channel
gradient, as well as other factors.
The implication of these slope-based analyses is that the
braiding intensity (total sinuosity) needed to reduce the ex-
cess slope to zero (i.e., for regime channel gradient to equal
valley gradient) then depends on the initial magnitude of the
excess gradient or excess stream power (the product of dis-
charge, channel gradient, and specific weight of water).
Greater excess power (gradient) would be expected to yield
Published by NRC Research Press
 Ashmore
greater braiding intensity and thus gradient controls the ex-
tent to which channels undergo the consecutive bifurcation
which ‘‘perpetuates itself until the equilibrium or regime
state is reached’’ (Yalin and da Silva 2001). Thus, the inten-
sity of braiding, as well as the occurrence of braiding, is a
regime adjustment of the river.
2.2 Empirical evidence for braiding intensity regime
adjustment
Direct testing of the ‘excess gradient’ hypothesis for
braiding discussed above is frustrated by the empirical scat-
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by EPFL BIBLIOTHEQUE USD on 12/02/20
ter and range of theoretical solutions of regime gradient
(Ferguson 1987). However, there is general empirical sup-
port for the idea that steeper valley gradient (or flume gra-
dient, in the case of experimental analysis) increases
braiding intensity. For example, Robertson-Rintoul and Ri-
chards (1993) analyzed gravel bed braided and meandering
rivers in terms of total sinuosity — the length of all chan-
nels per unit valley length — within a given valley length.
Channel pattern and valley gradient were measured directly
from maps of the rivers and data on flow and grain size
were extracted from a catalog of alluvial channel data
(Church et al. 1981). Data cover a range of river discharge
from 2 to 5500 m3s–1. The results show that total sinuosity
(P) increases with increasing stream power index (product
of Q, the mean annual flood, and Sv, the valley gradient)
For personal use only.
with a secondary (and inverse) effect of bed material grain
size (D84):
½1 P ¼ 1 þ 5:52ðQSv Þ0:4 D84 0:14
The generality of the predictions is unknown, but the rela-
tionship demonstrates some important points. There is a
clear, continuous trend of increasing total sinuosity (braiding
intensity) with increasing stream power index and that braid-
ing intensity increases with increasing stream energy above
the braiding threshold, with observed maximum total sinuos-
ity of about eight (Robertson-Rintoul and Richards 1993).
As sinuosity increases, for medium-coarse gravel, the chan-
nel pattern switches to braided (from single channel) at
QSv values above about 0.1 (with some variation due to
particle size), and total sinuosity greater than two. This is
in accordance with the ‘excess gradient’ model for the oc-
currence of braiding and the suggestion of Bettess and
White (1983) that braiding occurs at excess valley gradient
(i.e., channel sinuosity) greater than two. However, there is
overlap between single channels and braids over a range of
QSv values (meandering ceases to occur at QSv above
about 0.5).
Experimental studies from physical models also confirm
the idea that braiding intensity is a regime property of
braided rivers. It is notable that, as Murray and Paola
(1994) observed, the channel pattern adjustment in noncohe-
sive sand in laboratory experiments is always by braiding
once sinuosity exceeds a very low value (approximately
1.1). This suggests that, in the absence of other constraints
(e.g., high bank resistance), braiding is the ‘default’ channel
pattern adjustment. Recent studies (Egozi 2006; Bertoldi et
al. 2009b; Egozi and Ashmore 2009) show that, beginning
from an initial single, straight channel, braiding intensity
gradually increases over time (accompanied by increasing
1659
overall channel width), at a given slope and discharge, until
reaching a stable average value around which instantaneous
braiding intensity fluctuates. This ‘equilibrium’ braiding in-
tensity increases with stream power or discharge for a given
grain size. A step increase in discharge, at constant flume
(valley) gradient in an established stable braided pattern,
causes an equivalent adjustment and increase in braiding in-
tensity (Egozi 2006; Egozi and Ashmore 2009). However,
new channels are added slowly over time so that there is a
fairly long adjustment period during which the channel net-
work expands to accommodate the increased discharge.
These additional channels are created by successive avul-
sions and by occasional bifurcations of existing channels.
Bertoldi et al. (2009b) propose a dimensionless discharge
and dimensionless stream power as a means of comparing
data from experiments (and field data) with a range of abso-
lute discharge, channel gradient, and grain size.
ðQSv Þ
½2 U ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
L ðgDd 3 Þ
Q
½3 Q ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
L ðgDd 3 Þ
where U* is the dimensionless stream power index, Q* is
the dimensionless total discharge, L is Q2/5/g1/5, Q is the to-
tal discharge, Sv is the valley or flume gradient, g is the ac-
celeration due to gravity, D is the submerged relative
density of sediment, 1.63, d is the median grain diameter of
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
the bed material, and gDd 3 is the Einstein scale for ana-
lysis of particle mobility.) The dimensionless length, L, was
first proposed by Bray (1982) for analysis of cross section
dimensions (width and depth) of single channels and has
been used recently by Parker et al. (2007) for this purpose.
Bertoldi et al. (2009b) adopted it for analysis of braided
river morphology. Channel width is often used to scale dis-
charge and stream power by river size for analysis of chan-
nel morphology and sediment flux, but in the case of
braided rivers it is not clear which of several possible defi-
nitions of width should be adopted and can be measured
consistently. Consequently Bertoldi et al. (2009b) used L as
a length scale instead of width for both the response vari-
ables (channel morphology) and external control of the mor-
phology.
Braiding intensity appears to correlate better with Q* than
with U* (Bertoldi et al. 2009b). In other words, the regime
adjustment is primarily related to channel capacity to con-
vey the imposed discharge at the given gradient and bed
roughness. This is consistent with the observations that,
when formative discharge is stepped upward, flow first
drowns the pre-existing channel network and then the net-
work gradually accommodates the increased flow by eroding
new channels and (possibly) enlarging some existing ones
(Egozi 2006).
When compared with field data from several gravel-bed
braided rivers in New Zealand (Mosley 1981) (some of the
same data used by Robertson-Rintoul and Richards 1993),
the field and experimental data do not quite collapse onto
the same overall trend (Fig. 3), although both field and lab-
oratory data cover a very similar range of braiding intensity.
The reason for the offset of the laboratory and field data is
Published by NRC Research Press
 1660
Fig. 3. Braiding intensity as a function of dimensionless discharge
(eq. [2] for physical model experiments (Bertoldi et al. 2009b;
Egozi and Ashmore 2009) and several gravel-bed braided rivers in
New Zealand.
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by EPFL BIBLIOTHEQUE USD on 12/02/20
not known, although a combination of effects is possible, in-
For personal use only.
cluding error in measurement of braiding intensity on maps
or aerial photographs, influence of flow and channel pattern
history, vegetation and other secondary effects in the field,
uncertainty in defining and measuring an index discharge
for the field data, uncertainty and differences in grain size
distributions, and the effect of constant discharge in the lab-
oratory experiments. If bank resistance is an important sec-
ondary control on braiding (Ferguson 1987; Millar 2000),
this effect would be expected to be greater in natural rivers,
where bank sediments, even when mainly noncohesive, have
inherent strength due to particle packing, structure, and fine-
grained matrix, which is often lacking in laboratory sedi-
ments, and due to bank vegetation. This higher bank
strength is one candidate for the systematic bias towards
lower braiding intensity in full-scale rivers compared with
laboratory channels with the same dimensionless discharge.
2.3 Mechanisms controlling braiding intensity
Another way of considering the limits to braiding inten-
sity is that, without adjustment in channel gradient or a
change in bed material grain size, as discharge in an individ-
ual anabranch is reduced by successive bifurcation, the bed
shear stress approaches the critical threshold for motion and
bed material transport, theoretically, ceases at a threshold
braiding intensity. In general, assuming that mean flow
depth in a regime channel is proportional to about the 0.3
power of discharge (typical for many empirical and theoret-
ical analyses), then splitting the channel into two anab-
ranches with half the discharge in each would reduce shear
stress by a factor of about 1.25. If the channel begins with
shear stress, say 1.4 times critical, (typical for single gravel-
bed channels with little bank vegetation (Parker et al.
2007)), then very few subdivisions can occur before the
channel can no longer transport bed material supplied from
upstream. This suggests a fairly tight constraint on the pos-
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 36, 2009
sible number of successive channel subdivisions during the
development of braiding if bed material flux is to be main-
tained in all channels.
The average number of channels in a river cross section
that transport bed material and are involved in development
of the channel morphology is referred to as the ‘active
braiding intensity’ (Ashmore 2001) (Table1). The active
channels at a given time are a subset of the total number of
channels, i.e., active braiding intensity is equal to or less
than the braiding intensity. Braiding intensity, although still
a regime characteristic of braided rivers, is formed and sus-
tained over time by the migration, avulsion, and (transient)
abandonment of a much smaller number of active channels
(Ashmore 2001). Abandoned channels remain open, and
may carry flow, and so remain part of the total braiding in-
tensity and may be reactivated some time later (Egozi 2006;
Egozi and Ashmore 2009).
Active braiding intensity is, like braiding intensity, a re-
gime property of the river, varying with stream power for a
given bed material grain size. It is difficult to obtain field
data on this point, although, given cross-sectional topogra-
phy, the bed area and number of channels that, theoretically,
have bed shear stress above critical can be calculated (Ber-
toldi et al. 2009a). Laboratory experiments (Ashmore 1991a;
Egozi 2006; Bertoldi et al. 2009b) show that active braiding
intensity correlates well with stream power (but less clearly
with discharge) in each set of constant discharge experi-
ments and that the data collapse into a single trend when
plotted against dimensionless stream power (Fig. 4) (a least
squares regression using a power function to fit these data
has an exponent of 0.77, but a larger sample size is needed
to do a reliable statistical analysis). It is also clear that the
number of active channels at a given time under channel-
forming discharge is much less than the total number of
channels. In laboratory experiments, active braiding inten-
sity seldom exceeds three, and is often less than two. The
ratio of active to total number of channels is typically about
0.5, but varies between 0.3 and 0.8, depending on the di-
mensionless stream power (Bertoldi et al. 2009b; Egozi and
Ashmore 2009). Therefore, the ratio of active to total num-
ber of channels in the river is also a regime property that
adjusts gradually to changes in channel-forming discharge
and is controlled by dimensionless stream power. The ad-
justment of this ratio to a step increase in discharge occurs
by an almost immediate increase in active braiding intensity,
as flow levels increase in existing channels and a gradual in-
crease in the braiding intensity that results in a gradual de-
crease in the active intensity to braiding intensity ratio
(Egozi and Ashmore 2009).
The mechanism (or mechanisms) that maintains active
braiding intensity at approximately half the braiding inten-
sity is still under discussion. It seems likely that bifurcation
dynamics is a significant element of this adjustment. Field
and laboratory observations, theory, and numerical models
(Federici and Paola 2003; Zolezzi et al. 2006; Bertoldi and
Tubino 2007; Kleinhans et al. 2008) have shown that in
many cases, although a bifurcation (or avulsion) may ini-
tially have flow and bed load in both branches, this symmet-
rical configuration is unstable. Commonly a bifurcation
evolves to a state of asymmetry in which both branches
carry flow, but one has larger discharge than the other, and
Published by NRC Research Press
 Ashmore
Fig. 4. Active braiding intensity as a function dimensionless stream
power (eq. [3]) for three sets of physical model experiments.
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by EPFL BIBLIOTHEQUE USD on 12/02/20
in which the larger branch maintains bed load transport
whereas the smaller one does not. If this trajectory is com-
mon in braided river bifurcations, then this could account
for the ratio of total to active branches averaging about 0.5
at any given time under channel-forming flows. Larger di-
mensionless power (or excess shear stress) would make it
possible to maintain transport in a larger number of
branches. Egozi and Ashmore (2009) also identify a process
of ‘‘partial avulsion’’ in which a large channel switches into
For personal use only.
a new, or pre-existing (previously abandoned), channel with-
out closing off the original channel, so maintaining flow in
both the original channel and the avulsion channel, but hav-
ing bed load in only one of them. In these ways, the local
channel-scale processes affect the larger scale regime char-
acter of the channel pattern as a whole. It is important to
note that all of the analysis to date concerns gravel-bed riv-
ers (or physical models of gravel-bed rivers) and the condi-
tions (dimensionless power) in sand-bed rivers may be quite
different.
2.4 Limits to braiding: discussion
It is clear that there are limits to braiding intensity im-
posed by the discharge and gradient of the channel, which
constitute regime properties of the river. Braiding does not
propagate by successive subdivision of channels to any great
extent, if at all. It is controlled by the basic physics of the
river. If bed load is conveyed in only one or two channels,
with the remainder of the network conveying only water and
formed over time by migration, avulsion, and bifurcation of
the active channels, then the ‘excess slope’ model of braid-
ing intensity (Bettess and White 1983; Yalin 1992) should
refer to active braiding intensity. If braiding intensity (total
sinuosity) averages four, for example, this is likely to be
equivalent to an active braiding intensity of 1.5–2.0 in most
gravel-bed rivers, so that braiding occurs at excess slopes
similar to that of meandering. This is contrary to the argu-
ment of Bettess and White (Bettess and White 1983) that
braiding requires excess slope two or three times the regime
slope (which is hydraulically problematic because it implies
initially very high excess shear stress). The low excess slope
for braiding (which may be close to that for meandering) is
roughly consistent with laboratory models and with field ob-
servation. The ‘choice’ (Yalin 1992) of braiding, rather than
meandering, is then a matter of which patterns are possible
1661
under other constraints. Murray and Paola (1994) suggest
that braiding is likely in mobile, noncohesive alluvium un-
less there is significant bank resistance, which limits river
channel widening and bend cutoff. This is close to Yalin’s
(1992) conception of the occurrence of braiding in which in-
itial single channel width (aspect ratio) determines the bar
mode and therefore the type of channel pattern formed.
Paola (2001) argues that the ultimate control on aspect ratio
(and channel gradient) is the upstream sediment flux (bed
load) relative to discharge. This is also strongly modulated
by changes in particle size such that finer sediment favours
higher braiding intensity, which is consistent with empirical
observations (Carson 1984; Robertson-Rintoul and Richards
1993; Chew and Ashmore 2001). Vegetation is also a major
control on bank resistance and therefore on channel pattern
morphology and dynamics. Recent work has shown that ri-
parian vegetation limits and modifies established braided
patterns by reducing channel instability (rates of lateral mi-
gration), reducing (active) braiding intensity (Gran and
Paola 2001; Tal et al. 2004), and modifying the conditions
for the occurrence of braiding (Millar 2000). A complete
theory of the limits to braiding intensity should include
these effects.
3. Characteristic length of braided channel
patterns
3.1 Bars, braiding, and length scales
Single-channel rivers often have a definable morphologi-
cal wavelength defined by the along-channel spacing of
pool-bar units or the wavelength of quasi-regular meanders.
This apparent, dominant morphological length scale is re-
ferred to here as the ‘characteristic length’ of the channel
morphology (Fig. 2). Yalin (1992), along with others (see
reviews by Ferguson 1993 and Bridge 1993), places consid-
erable emphasis on the role of bars in the development of
meanders and braided channel patterns. Yalin (1992) argues
that single row bars (alternate bars) are the precursor to me-
anders whereas double (or multiple) row bars are the precur-
sor to braiding (Figs. 4 and 5). These distinctions are also a
prominent component of theoretical analyses of braiding us-
ing stability analysis of bars and flow-bed topography inter-
actions (Parker 1976). Laboratory experiments with erodible
banks confirm the role of initial bar formation in braided
channel pattern development, but show that braiding may
originate equally well from single row (alternate) bars as
from multiple row bars (Ferguson 1987, 1993; Bolla et al.
2001). These transitions also occur within individual anab-
ranches (the defined, separate channels within the braided
river) of an active braiding river (Ashmore 1991b), but in
this case multiple row bars are rare because the aspect ratio
of individual anabranches favours the formation of alternate
bars or single central bars (which are common downstream
from anabranch confluence scour pools). Ashmore (1991b)
showed that braiding often initiated by chute cutoff (by
passing) of lateral or point bars in low sinuosity single chan-
nels (with simultaneous channel widening) (Bridge 1993,
Figs. 1 and 7). Under these conditions, overall channel
width increases to an equilibrium state as part of the channel
pattern development, rather than being the initial state lead-
ing to multiple row bars, as in Yalin’s (1992) view. In all
Published by NRC Research Press
 1662
Fig. 5. Transitions from single and multiple row bars (upper and
lower sketches) to braided channel morphology showing inheritance
of bar wavelength and development of a characteristic length scale
of braided channel pattern (middle sketch). lb is the unit bar wave-
length and LB is the ‘braid wavelength’.
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by EPFL BIBLIOTHEQUE USD on 12/02/20
For personal use only.
cases, bars are a fundamental precursor to braiding and a
fundamental unit of braided river morphodynamics and this
unifies them with other river channel pattern types in which
bed-load transport is a significant morphological process
(Ferguson 1987, Fig. 6).
Given that alternate, central, or multiple-row bars are a
precursor to braiding and a component of the resulting chan-
nel pattern dynamics, then it is reasonable to theorize that
elements of braided pattern length scales are related to the
wavelength of bars and the spatial patterns of deposition
and bifurcation related to those features. For example, Yalin
(1992) proposed that braiding from double-row bars in-
volves bifurcation around a central bar (Bridge 1993) from
which he theorizes that the along-channel spacing of up-
stream convergence and downstream divergence around a
central bar is three times the initial channel width. The ini-
tial braided pattern then has a characteristic length (bar
wavelength) inherited from the bars from which the pattern
first develops. Yalin (1992) goes on to argue that the initial
regular multiple bar pattern and wavelength is then disrupted
because the two channels on either side of the central bar
then develop their own bars at a wavelength commensurate
with their own dimensions and discharge and therefore
shorter than the initial bar pattern. Figure 5 illustrates, con-
ceptually, the development of braiding from multiple and
single row bars, and the inheritance of initial bar wavelength
in the braided channel.
The same basic argument is true for braiding developed
from cutoff of initial low sinuosity (single row bars) mean-
ders (Dietrich 1987). There remains uncertainty about the
wavelength of this initial alternate bar pattern. In general,
the wavelength scales with the channel width and Yalin
(1992) argues that the scaling for single row bars is, theoret-
ically, six times the width (B), defining wavelength as the
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 36, 2009
along-channel distance between successive alternate bar
crests on the same side of the channel. The wavelength of
alternate bars, from flume experiments and observations, ap-
pears to involve much greater variability than this. For ex-
ample, Ikeda (1984) approximates bar wavelength as being
equal to 9B (Fig. 3) based on fixed-wall flume experiments.
There is considerable scatter in these data, partly because of
experimental errors, but also because bar wavelength is not
solely dependent on channel width. In fixed-width flumes,
wavelength may vary with other flow parameters, including
depth and friction coefficient, and a more recent compilation
(Bertoldi 2005) shows a wide range of observed values, with
some wavelength–width ratios exceeding 15. However, the
bulk of the data fall in the range of wavelength equal to 5–
12B (Fig. 6).
3.2 Braid wavelength
There seem to be very few analyses of bar wavelength in
erodible channels, rather than fixed wall flumes, but Ash-
more (1985, 1991b) measured initial alternate bar wave-
length to channel width ratios of 6.0–8.7 with an average of
7.5 in experimental analysis of the development of braiding
from straight channels. This ratio increased slightly to an
average of about 9.0 for the low sinuosity meanders that de-
veloped from the initial alternate bars. Braiding occurred by
chute-cutoff of established lateral bars, so that every second
alternate (point) bar became a central bar. At the same time,
lateral erosion removed the intervening lateral bar to be re-
placed by a confluence zone downstream of the central bar.
At the onset of braiding, the spacing of the initial central
bars created by cutoff of the low-sinuosity meander was
similar to, but slightly shorter (by a factor of about 0.9)
than, the immediate pre-cursor meanders. The shortening of
the wavelength is presumably the result of the smaller width
of the two separate branches formed by the bifurcation. As-
suming that anabranch width scales with the square root of
anabranch discharge and assuming equal division of the
flow in the bifurcation, then the wavelength of the bars in
the branch channels would be about 0.7 times that of the up-
stream single channel and the overall wavelength of the fea-
ture (from upstream confluences to downstream confluence)
would be approximately 0.85 of the initial bar wavelength
(Ashmore and Gardner 2008).
Bertoldi and Tubino (2005) have shown that bar wave-
length and bank wavelength (the wavelength of bank–line
plan curvature) coincide very closely, through the initial al-
ternate bar phase, into meander development and then to the
development of incipient bifurcation and braiding. This pro-
vides important experimental verification of the relationship
between initial bar morphodynamics and the river plan–form
characteristics. Crucially, incipient bifurcation occurred at a
threshold wavelength–channel width ratio of between 4.5
and 6.3, which is shorter than the initial wavelength–channel
width ratio of the alternate bars. The gradual decrease in
wavelength–channel width ratio during channel pattern de-
velopment occurs mainly by channel widening, not by in-
creasing bar wavelength. Thus the longitudinal spacing of
bifurcation points is tied to the wavelength of the initial
bars.
The wavelength of central or multiple-row bars has been
subject to much less analysis. Consequently, it is difficult to
Published by NRC Research Press
 Ashmore
Fig. 6. Bar wavelength: channel width ratios for mode 1 (see
Fig. 2) alternate bars. From Bertoldi (2005) and based on a compi-
lation of published data.
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by EPFL BIBLIOTHEQUE USD on 12/02/20
assess Yalin’s (1992) suggestion that upstream convergence
and downstream divergence around central bars have an ini-
tial length of 3B. Initiation of braiding around multiple
mode or central bars certainly occurs in the manner de-
scribed by Yalin (1992) (Fujita 1989; Ashmore 1991b; Jang
and Shimizu 2005), but the transition to braiding may be
more complicated than he proposed. In the most comprehen-
sive work on the problem, Fujita (1989) found experimen-
For personal use only.
tally that multiple row bars follow length and amplitude
relationships similar to single mode bars and assumed a ratio
of bar length to bar width of five. This ratio is roughly con-
sistent with Yalin’s (Yalin 1992) ‘‘3B proposition’’ for the
case of mode two bars. However, initial higher mode bar
patterns simplified progressively, by merging of bars, to-
wards more stable, lower mode bar patterns and only when
these lower modes were established did a distinct braided
channel pattern develop (Fujita 1989). This suggests that
bar wavelength may adjust during the transition from initial
bar geometry to a fully-developed braided channel. Subse-
quent numerical simulations and physical experiments (Jang
and Shimizu 2005) show this same tendency for initial bar
mode to be reduced during the transition to braiding from
initial double row bar morphology. The number of scour
pools along the flume decreased along with the simplifica-
tion of the channel pattern and then stabilized, suggesting a
stable average spacing of channel network nodes for the
braided pattern. Recent observations of Bertoldi et al.
(2009b) from physical models also show that the spatial
density of nodes, and the length of links in the braided net-
work, approached a stable value over time at a given con-
stant discharge. These observations are consistent with
Yalin’s (1992) general proposition. Furthermore, this analy-
sis of bar dynamics (e.g., simplification and stabilization at
low mode) also provides a possible explanation for the lim-
its to braiding intensity discussed in the first part of this pa-
per.
Length scaling of braided channel patterns can also be di-
rectly assessed by looking for morphological relationships
within developed braided patterns. An obvious candidate is
the confluence-bar morphological unit that is a basic compo-
nent of braided river morphology (see middle diagram in
Fig. 5). If these units function in the same way as pool-bar
units in single channels, and develop from initial simple
1663
central bars, then it is expected that they would have a sim-
ple scaling relationship similar to the width–wavelength
scaling of alternate bars. Direct measurement of the length
(confluence to head-of-bifurcation) and channel width
(average wetted width of the channel linking the confluence
and bifurcation) yields a consistent linear relationship cover-
ing both physical models and full scale rivers. The length
scale of the confluence–bifurcation unit is approximately
four to five times channel width (Hundey 2007; Hundey
and Ashmore 2009). Larger rivers have larger average spac-
ing for a sample of confluence-bifurcation units, suggesting
that the scaling applies to the river as a whole, as well as
individual units– larger rivers have wider anabranches with
greater length scales for the basic confluence–bifurcation
morphological units. This scaling seems to hold regardless
of whether the downstream bifurcation developed from
bend cutoff or from division around a central bar.
This regular spacing of nodes and the tendency for this to
increase with the overall size (discharge) of the river is also
apparent in analyzing the downstream spacing of nodes in a
braided river channel network (Ashmore 2001). By measur-
ing the number of confluences or diffluences in a unit length
of river, and dividing by the total length of channels in the
reach, the mean downstream node spacing or ‘braid wave-
length’ can be calculated. Measuring this braid wavelength
over a range of scales shows that it scales very strongly
with river discharge in the same way meander wavelength
does. In fact, the relationship parallels the commonly ob-
served square root relationship between discharge and mean-
der wavelength, but braid wavelength tends to be smaller, by
a factor of 0.8, than the meander wavelength for a single
channel with the same total discharge. Thus, this overall
length scaling of braided channel networks appears to reflect
the bar-scale development and control of braiding processes
and morphology.
4. Linking intensity and wavelength of
braided patterns
The first section of this paper shows that there are upper
limits to the intensity of braiding networks. There are two
primary reasons for this. One is the necessity to maintain
bed load transport as channels subdivide and the other is
the fact that, for a given imposed valley slope, only small
increases in total sinuosity of the active channel network
are needed to reach regime channel slope. If braided channel
networks have three or fewer active anabranches at any
time, and each has to be large enough to have significant
bed material flux, then the range of size of these active
channels must be limited (although, to date, there are no
data to verify this). This limit on the size (discharge, width,
and depth) of these active anabranches would place similar
constraints on the wavelength of unit pool-bar morphology
in the river. This is a way of explaining the well-defined
trend in average braid wavelength of rivers that occurs de-
spite the fact that a braided river usually has several anab-
ranches with differing dimensions. The secondary active
anabranches scale in their dimensions with the primary
anabranches, so limiting the range of anabranch dimensions
in a given braided river. This scaling is apparent in the
frequency distribution of relative lengths of confluence–
Published by NRC Research Press
 1664
bifurcation units (Hundey and Ashmore 2009) in which
data from physical models and full-scale rivers both cover
a range of approximately 0.3–3.0 times the mean. A simi-
lar distribution exists for link lengths within a braided net-
work (Ashmore 2001) although in this case there is often a
long tail of short links, which may represent falling stage
dissection of bar fronts and other small-scale features unre-
lated to the overall channel network. If this conceptual
model is correct, then rivers with higher active braiding in-
tensity may be expected to have a wider range of conflu-
ence–bifurcation and link lengths.
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by EPFL BIBLIOTHEQUE USD on 12/02/20
Characteristic length scales of braided channel patterns
were also found by Zanoni (2008) using Fourier and wavelet
analysis of braided river topography (from physical models)
to identify characteristic scales of morphology and associ-
ated processes. Fluctuations in bedload transport rate are
tied to temporal variation in active braiding intensity, time
scale of bifurcation development and bar migration, and
large-scale lateral migration of the channel network. At the
same time there are characteristic spatial scales in planform
and topography. For example, both active braiding intensity
and total wetted width (sum of wetted widths of each anab-
ranch) of the braided channel co-vary along the river and do
not vary with dimensionless stream power. The largest of
these scales is persistent in time and space and is about two
to three times the braid plain width (bank-to-bank width of
For personal use only.
the whole braided river) and relates to large scale braided
network morphology as measured by spatial variation in ac-
tive braiding index. Very similar characteristic lengths are
apparent in full-scale braided river patterns mapped from
aerial photographs or satellite images. Using braid plain
width as the scaling parameter means that there is no direct
relation to bar or other characteristic lengths of single chan-
nels, but there is clearly a persistent characteristic length of
braided networks that scales with the river size.
The limited range of active channel dimensions is appa-
rent in physical models of braiding. Subdivision of branch
channels, after the initial braid formation, is not commonly
seen. Instead, new channels are initiated by avulsion or bi-
furcation at the expense of existing active channels, which
serves to increase the braiding intensity (because abandoned
channels do not fill with sediment and may be re-occupied),
but not the active braiding intensity (Egozi and Ashmore
2009). In many cases the network consists of a single active
main anabranch with limited activity in secondary anab-
ranches. Active anabranches make the morphology, and
therefore the morphology reflects the size of these active
channels. Only at high values of dimensionless stream
power (high sediment mobility) is active braiding intensity
greater than two in most cases. Thus the physical limits to
braiding intensity impose regularities in the geometry and
length scale of the overall braided channel pattern and, at
the same time, the unit processes at bar scale are the mech-
anisms by which braiding intensity is established; local bar
dynamics and larger scale channel pattern characteristics are
closely connected.
Conclusions
There has been considerable recent progress on under-
standing the morphodynamics of braided rivers. Two main
conclusions emerge from this work:
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 36, 2009
 The intensity of braiding is a regime condition governed
by either the total discharge of the river (in the case of
total braiding intensity) or the total stream power (in the
case of active braiding intensity). The proportion of ac-
tive anabranches relative to the braiding intensity is typi-
cally about 0.3–0.6 and this may be an outcome of bar
stability and of bifurcation dynamics, which often leads
to asymmetric bifurcations with both channels conveying
flow, but only one of the two channels actively transport-
ing bed load.
 Braided channel patterns have a characteristic length in-
herited from the length of the initial bar morphology
from which they develop, which then persists within indi-
vidual units of the established braided channel. The dis-
tribution of characteristic lengths of individual units is
constrained by the limited number and size of active ana-
branches in a braided river, so that there is a close con-
nection between unit processes at the channel and bar
scale and the overall intensity and length scale of braided
channel networks.
Acknowledgements
My fundamental research on braiding is funded primar-
ily by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research
Council of Canada. I thank Walter Bertoldi for sharing
his data on braiding intensity and giving permission to
use a diagram from his Ph.D. thesis. My students, Roey
Egozi, Tobi Gardner, and Beth Hundey, did much of the
experimental work, data analysis, and helped in the devel-
opment of ideas incorporated into this paper. Thanks also
to Karen van Kerkoerle for her work on the figures. The
paper benefitted from the comments of two anonymous
referees. This paper is a contribution to a special issue in
memory of Professor Selim Yalin, who was always inter-
ested in, and supportive of, my work. He was more influ-
ential on the development of my understanding of river
mechanics than he knew. I am grateful to Ana da Silva
and ‘Krish’ Krishnappan for inviting me to contribute to
this volume. Some of the ideas in this paper can be traced
back to my MSC and PhD research projects and I remain
grateful to John Shaw and Gary Parker for their influence
and for setting me on a career path intertwined with
braiding.
References
Ashmore, P.E. 1985. Process and form in gravel braided streams:
laboratory modelling and field observations. Ph.D. thesis, Uni-
versity of Alberta, Edmonton, Alta.
Ashmore, P.E. 1991a. Channel morphology and bed-load pulses in
braided gravel-bed streams. Geografiska Annaler, 73(1): 37–52.
doi:10.2307/521212.
Ashmore, P.E. 1991b. How do gravel bed rivers braid? Canadian
Journal of Earth Sciences, 28(3): 326–341.
Ashmore, P.E. 2001. Braiding phenomena: statics and kinetics, In
Gravel Bed Rivers V. Edited by M.P. Mosley. New Zealand Hy-
drological Society, Christchurch, New Zealand. pp. 95–120.
Ashmore, P., and Gardner, J.T. 2008. Unconfined confluences as
elements of braided river morphology. In River Confluences,
Tributaries and the Fluvial Network. Edited by S. Rice, A. Roy,
and B. Rhoads. Wiley, Chichester, UK. pp. 119–143.
Bertoldi, W. 2005. River bifurcations. In Monographs of the School
Published by NRC Research Press
 Ashmore
of Doctoral studies in Environmental Engineering, No. 6. Uni-
versity of Trento, Italy. 123 p..
Bertoldi, W., and Tubino, M. 2005. Bed and bank evolution of bi-
furcating channels. Water Resources Research, 41(7): W07001.
doi:10.1029/2004WR003333.
Bertoldi, W., and Tubino, M. 2007. River bifurcations: experimen-
tal observations on equilibrium configurations. Water Resources
Research, 43(10): W10437. doi:10.1029/2007WR005907.
Bertoldi, W., Ashmore, P., and Tubino, M. 2009a. A method for
estimating the mean bedload flux in braided rivers. Geomorphol-
ogy, 103(3): 330–340. doi:10.1016/j.geomorph.2008.06.014.
Bertoldi, W., Zanoni, L., and Tubino, M. 2009b. Planform dy-
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by EPFL BIBLIOTHEQUE USD on 12/02/20
namics of braided streams. Earth Surface Processes and Land-
forms, 34(4): 547–557. doi:10.1002/esp.1755.
Bettess, R., and White, W.R. 1983. Meandering and braiding of al-
luvial channels. Proceedings of the Institute of Civil Engineers,
75(3): 525–538.
Blench, T. 1969. Mobile-bed fluviology. The University of Alberta
Press, Edmonton, Alta.
Bolla, M., Federici, B., Repetto, R., Paola, C., Seminara, G., and
Tubino, M. 2001. The morphodynamics of braiding rivers: ex-
perimental and theoretical results of unit processes. In Gravel
Bed Rivers V. Edited by P.M. Mosley New Zealand Hydrologi-
cal Society, Christchurch, New Zealand. pp. 143–180.
Bray, D. 1982. Regime relations for gravel-bed rivers. In Gravel-
Bed Rivers. Edited by R.D. Hey, J.C. Bathurst, and C.R. Thorne.
John Wiley, Chichester, UK. pp. 517–542.
For personal use only.
Bridge, J.S. 1993. The interaction between channel geometry, water
flow, sediment transport and deposition in braided rivers. In
Braided Rivers: Form, Process and Economic Application. Edi-
ted by J.L. Best and C. Bristow. Geological Society Special Pub-
lication 75. Geological Society, London. pp. 13–71.
Carson, M.A. 1984. The meandering-braided river threshold: A re-
appraisal. Journal of Hydrology (Amsterdam), 73(3-4): 315–334.
doi:10.1016/0022-1694(84)90006-4.
Chew, L.C., and Ashmore, P.E. 2001. Channel adjustment and a
test of rational regime theory in a proglacial braided stream.
Geomorphology, 37(1-2): 43–63. doi:10.1016/S0169-555X(00)
00062-3.
Church, M., Moore, D. and Rood, K. 1981. Catalogue of alluvial
channel regime data. Department of Geography, University of
British Columbia.
Dietrich, W.E., 1987. Mechanics of flow and sediment transport in
river bends. In River Channels: environment and process. Edited
by K. Richards, The Institute of British Geographers, Blackwell,
Oxford, pp. 179–227.
Egozi, R. 2006. Channel pattern variation in gravel-bed rivers.
Ph.D. thesis, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.
Egozi, R., and Ashmore, P.E. 2008. Defining and measuring braid-
ing intensity. Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 33(14):
2121–2138. doi:10.1002/esp.1658.
Egozi, R., and Ashmore, P. 2009. Experimental analysis of braided
channel pattern response to increased discharge. Journal of Geo-
physical Research, 114(F2): F02012. doi:10.1029/
2008JF001099.
Federici, B., and Paola, C. 2003. Dynamics of channel bifurcations
in noncohesive sediments. Water Resources Research, 39(6):
1162. doi:10.1029/2002WR001434.
Ferguson, R.I. 1987. Hydraulic and sedimentary controls of channel
pattern. In River Channels: environment and process. Edited by
K. Richards, The Institute of British Geographers, Blackwell,
Oxford, pp. 129–158.
Ferguson, R.I. 1993. Understanding braiding processes in gravel-
bed rivers: progress and unsolved problems. In Braided Rivers:
1665
Form, Process and Economic Epplication. Edited by J.L. Best
and C. Bristow. Geological Society Special Publication 75. Geo-
logical Society, London. pp. 73–87.
Fujita, Y. 1989. Bar and channel formation in braided streams. In
River Meandering. Edited by S. Ikeda and G. Parker. Mono-
graph 12. American Geophysical Union Water Resources, Wa-
shington, D.C. pp. 417–462.
Galay, V.J., Rood, K.M., and Miller, S. 1998. Human interference
with braided gravel-bed rivers. In Gravel-bed Rivers in the En-
vironment. Edited by P.C. Klingeman, R.L. Beschta, P.D. Ko-
mar, and J.B. Bradley. Water Resources Publications LLC,
Highlands Ranch, Colo. pp. 471–512.
Gran, K., and Paola, C. 2001. Riparian vegetation controls on
braided stream dynamics. Water Resources Research, 37(12):
3275–3283. doi:10.1029/2000WR000203.
Hundey, E. 2007. Length scales of braided river morphology. Hon-
ours thesis, University of Western Ontario, London, Ont.
Hundey, E., and Ashmore, P. 2009. Length scale of braided river
morphology. Water Resources Research, 45(8): W08409.
doi:10.1029/2008WR007521.
Ikeda, S. 1984. Prediction of alternate bar wavelength and height.
Journal of Hydraulic Engineering, 110(4): 371–386. doi:10.
1061/(ASCE)0733-9429(1984)110:4(371).
Jang, C.-L., and Shimizu, Y. 2005. Numerical simulation of rela-
tively wide, shallow channels with erodible banks. Journal of
Hydraulic Engineering, 131(7): 565–575. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)
0733-9429(2005)131:7(565).
Kleinhans, M., Jagers, H.R.A., Mosselman, E., and Sloff, C.J.
2008. Bifurcation dynamics and avulsion duration in meandering
rivers by one-dimensional and three-dimensional models. Water
Resources Research, 44(8): W08454. doi:10.1029/
2007WR005912.
Leopold, L. B. and Wolman, M. G., 1957. River channel patterns:
braided, meandering and straight. U.S. Geological Survey Profe-
sional Paper 282B, pp. 39–85.
Millar, R.G. 2000. Influence of bank vegetation on alluvial channel
patterns. Water Resources Research, 36(4): 1109–1118. doi:10.
1029/1999WR900346.
Mosley, P.M. 1981. Semi-determinate hydraulic geometry of river
channels, South Island, New Zealand. Earth Surface Processes
and Landforms, 6(2): 127–137. doi:10.1002/esp.3290060206.
Murray, A.B., and Paola, C. 1994. A cellular model of braided riv-
ers. Nature, 371(6492): 54–57. doi:10.1038/371054a0.
Paola, C. 2001. Modelling stream braiding over a range of scales.
In Gravel Bed Rivers V. Edited by M.P. Mosley. New Zealand
Hydrological Society, Christchurch, New Zealand. pp. 11–46.
Parker, G. 1976. On the cause and characteristic scales of meander-
ing and braiding in rivers. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 76(3):
457–480. doi:10.1017/S0022112076000748.
Parker, G., Wilcock, P., Paola, C., Dietrich, W., and Pitlick, J.
2007. Physical basis for quasi-universal relations for bankfull
hydraulic geometry of single-thread gravel bed rivers. Journal
of Geophysical Research, 112F4: F04005. doi:10.1029/
2006JF000549.
Richards, K.S., 1982. Rivers: Form and process in alluvial chan-
nels. Methuen, New York.
Robertson-Rintoul, M.S.E., and Richards, K.S. 1993. Braided chan-
nel pattern and paleohydrology using an index of total sinuosity.
In Braided Rivers: Form, Process and Economic Application.
Edited by J.L. Best and C.S. Bristow. Geological Society Spe-
cial Publication 75. Geological Society, London. pp. 113–118.
Tal, M., Gran, K., Murray, A.B., Paola, C., and Hicks, D.M. 2004.
Riparian vegetation as a primary control on channel characteris-
tics in multi-thread rivers. In Riparian Vegetation and Fluvial
Published by NRC Research Press
 1666
Geomorphology. Edited by S.J. Bennett and A. Simon. Mono-
graph 8. American Geophysical Union, Water Science and Ap-
plication, Washington, D.C. pp. 43–58.
Yalin, M.S. 1992. River Mechanics. Pergamon, Oxford.
Yalin, M.S., and da Silva, A.M.F. 2001. Fluvial Processes. Interna-
tional Association of Hydraulic Engineering and Research,
Delft, The Netherlands.
Zanoni, L. 2008. Field and laboratory evidence of large scale dy-
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Downloaded from cdnsciencepub.com by EPFL BIBLIOTHEQUE USD on 12/02/20
For personal use only.
Can. J. Civ. Eng. Vol. 36, 2009
namics in braided rivers. Ph.D. thesis, University of Trento,
Italy.
Zolezzi, G., Bertoldi, W., and Tubino, M. 2006. Morphological
analysis and prediction of channel bifurcations. In Braided Riv-
ers: Process, Deposits, Ecology and Management. Edited by G.
H. Sambrook-Smith, J. L. Best, C. S. Bristow, and G. E. Petts.
Special Publication 36. International Association of Sedimentol-
ogists, Blackwell, Chichester, UK. pp. 227–250.
Published by NRC Research Press