Nearshore Bedforms

Romain Vaucher and Shahin E Dashtgard , Applied Research in Ichnology and Sedimentology (ARISE) Group, Department of Earth
Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC, Canada
© 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1 Bedforms in nearshore settings 1

2 Flow conditions for generating bedforms 3
2.1 Unidirectional flow 4
2.2 Oscillatory flow 4
2.3 Combined-flow 5
3 Bedform distributions 6
3.1 Ripples 7
3.2 Dunes 9
3.3 Upper-stage plane beds 11
3.4 Supercritical bedforms 11
4 Tide modulation of bedform distributions 13
5 Summary and conclusions 13
References 15

1 Bedforms in nearshore settings

Bedforms (or bed forms) are transient features that develop at the interface between sediment (e.g., mud, sand, gravel) and a fluid
(e.g., water, air). The fluid puts sediment in motion, and the resulting architecture is the bedform. Their morphology changes
temporally and is a direct function of two components: (i) the flow conditions in the transport media, mainly water in nearshore
settings; and, (ii) the texture of the sediment, mainly grain size and sorting. Together, flow properties and sediment texture define
the bed phase in which a specific type a bedform can develop (Dumas et al., 2005; Perillo et al., 2014a). Bedforms are primarily
defined in two dimensions by their wavelength (l) and height (
), and they can also be classified by the bedform index, bedform
symmetry index, and bedform roundness index (Perillo et al., 2014a) (Fig. 1).
Nearshore bedforms and bedforms in general are either flat (
¼ 0) or in relief (
> 0) with positive (crest) and negative (trough)
topographies (Figs. 1 and 2). They can be divided into five groups based on the friction force exerted by the water (y, the shear
stress), the threshold value of the friction force needed to put sediment in motion (yc, the critical shear stress), and the wavelength
(l) and height (
) of the bedform (Perillo et al., 2014a):

− No motion: y < yc and
¼ 0

− Ripple: y > yc, l < 0.5 m and
< 0.05 m
− Dune: y > yc, l > 0.5 m and
> 0.05 m
− Lower-Stage Plane Bed: y  yc and
¼ 0
− Upper-Stage Plane Bed: y > yc and
¼ 0

Ripples, dunes and upper-stage plane beds are the most frequently encountered bedforms in nearshore environments. These
bedforms correlate to small ripples, larges ripples (including sandwaves and megaripples), and plane beds, respectively, in older
classifications (Perillo et al., 2014a).
Nearshore environments encompass the zone extending from the shoreline to effective fair-weather wave base; a zone
commonly referred to as the foreshore and shoreface (Fig. 3). Effective fair-weather wave base is the outer limit where waves
interact with the seafloor and can remobilize sand-sized sediment, and its depth is  L/2, where (L) is the wavelength of the
incoming wave. Below that water depth, seafloor environments are referred to as the offshore, shelf, etc. The interaction of waves
with the seafloor marks the transition from oscillatory (symmetric) to translatory (symmetric to asymmetric) waves in the shoaling
zone (Fig. 3). Translatory waves generate a net movement of the water mass (i.e., net unidirectional motion) through which they
travel, and oscillatory waves exhibit no net movement (i.e., oscillatory motion). Through the shoaling zone, waves decrease in
wavelength and increase in height until they break, and their orbitals flatten toward an elliptical shape. Wave breaking occurs when
the wave height (from trough to crest) is generally  0.78 of the water depth (e.g., Davidson-Arnott, 2009). The position of the
breaking zone is thus primarily defined by the height of the incident wave and its wavelength. In intermediate to dissipative
(shallowly seaward dipping) nearshore environments, after waves break they can reform and travel as turbulent bores of reduced
amplitude and shorter wavelength landward through the surf zone before producing swash and subsequent backwash at the
shoreline. In contrast, waves break in much close proximity to the shoreline for reflective (steeply seaward dipping) nearshores or
simply surge up the foreshore without breaking at all, depending of the steepness of the nearshore and properties of incident waves
(e.g., Galvin, 1968; Clifton et al., 1971; Short, 1991, 2020; Beji and Battjes, 1993; Masselink and Short, 1993; Dally, 2005; Masselink
and Puleo, 2006; Davidson-Arnott, 2009; Aagaard et al., 2013; Anthony and Aagaard, 2020 (Fig. 3).

Treatise on Geomorphology https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818234-5.00093-6 1

2 Nearshore Bedforms

wavelength (λ)
stoss side (λs) lee side (λl)
trough crest trough

height (η) λ0.5s η

Bedform Index Bedform Symmetry Index Bedform roudness Index

BI = λη-1 BSI = λlλs-1 BRI = λ0.5sλs-1

Fig. 1 Simple bedform in cross-section and the main nomenclature used to define it. The various parameters used to describe bedforms are shown. Illustration
adapted from Dumas S, Arnott RWC and Southard JB (2005) Experiments on oscillatory-flow and combined-flow bed forms: Implications for interpreting parts of the
shallow-marine sedimentary record. Journal of Sedimentary Research 75: 501–513, and Perillo MM, Best J and Garcia MH (2014a) A new phase diagram for
combined-flow bedforms. Journal of Sedimentary Research 84: 301–313.

A B

C
D

Fig. 2 Examples of bedforms found in proximal nearshore environments. (A) Wave and (B) current ripples, (Iona Beach, lower delta plain tidal flat, Fraser Delta,
Canada). (C) Upper-stage plane beds and (D) supercritical bedforms overtopped by wave and current ripples (tip of Cap Ferret, France). The increments on scale bars
are in cm.

Nearshore
Foreshore Shoreface Offshore
upper middle lower
Translatory waves Oscillatory waves

Swash zone Surf zone Breaking zone Shoaling zone

HT

LT wave orbital
bar

bar

fwwb
not to scale

Fig. 3 Non-deltaic coastal zonation. The limit between nearshore and offshore environments is the transition from oscillatory to translatory waves. This limit is
effective fair-weather wave base (fwwb) and marks the depth at which the orbital motion of incoming waves can mobilize seafloor sediment. Arrows represent the
relative motion of the water. Note the increasing asymmetry of the arrows across the nearshore profile. HT: high-tide shoreline; LT: low-tide shoreline; msl: mean
sea level.
 Nearshore Bedforms 3

Nearshore environments are subject to complex currents due to the dominance and/or interaction of wave-, tide- and
river-induced flows (e.g., Dalrymple et al., 1992; Davidson-Arnott, 2009; Short, 2020; Dashtgard et al., 2021) that generate multiple
bedforms patterns (Fig. 2) (e.g., Inman, 1957; Clifton et al., 1971; Davidson-Arnott and Greenwood, 1974; Miller and Komar, 1980;
Rubin and McCulloch, 1980; Allen, 1982; Shipp, 1984; Greenwood and Sherman, 1986; Ramsay et al., 1989; Sherman and
Greenwood, 1989; Osborne and Vincent, 1993; Li and Amos, 1999; Chauhan, 2000; Doucette, 2000; Swales et al., 2006; Dashtgard
et al., 2009; Baas et al., 2016; Sherman, 2018; Vaucher et al., 2018a,b; Wu and Parsons, 2019). Of the three coastal processes
affecting the nearshore, tide- and river-induced flows generate bi- or unidirectional flows (e.g., ebb and flood current, tidal bore,
river flooding) whereas wave-induced currents are either oscillatory, unidirectional or combined-flow depending on water depth
and wave approach direction. The grain size of sediment in the nearshore seafloor also impacts wave-induced flows, and specifically
the development of offshore-oriented rip currents and alongshore currents.
In this article, we present nearshore bedforms and their stability phases when generated under unidirectional-, oscillatory- and
combined-flow via experimental conditions. We then discuss bedform distributions in natural nearshore environments and link
these distributions to experimental studies. Nearshore bars, which are large bedforms, are not considered here.

2 Flow conditions for generating bedforms

The quantitative characterization of bedforms and the processes that form them are mainly derived from experimental flume studies
that attempt to mimic natural conditions under which bedforms develop. Determining physical controls on bedform formation in
nearshore environments is addressed in numerous studies as they are key features for interpreting sedimentary structures in the rock
record (e.g., Allen, 1968; Clifton et al., 1971; Komar, 1974; Clifton, 1976; Clifton and Dingler, 1984; Southard et al., 1990;
Southard, 1991; Immenhauser, 2009; Bradley and Venditti, 2017; Mahon and McElroy, 2018). Bedforms generated in the nearshore
are generally affected by combined flow (i.e., a combination of unidirectional and oscillatory flows) and several experimental
studies have attempted to simulate natural conditions (e.g., Arnott and Southard, 1990; Southard, 1991; Dumas et al., 2005; Perillo
et al., 2014a,b,c). To understand how sediments are organized under variable flow conditions, bedforms developed under
unidirectional and oscillatory flows are discussed below followed by a discussion of combined flow.
Most flume studies were done under a range of water temperatures as increasing water temperature decreases viscosity. Water
viscosity impacts the critical shear stress of grains. However, in nearshore environments, natural variations in water temperature are
approximately 0–30  C, which is insufficient to produce significant variation in viscosity (e.g., Perillo et al., 2014a). Consequently,
the influence of water temperature variations on bedform generation is not discussed further.
Many experimental approaches have been employed in flume studies, and most experiments use: (i) well-sorted, non-cohesive
sediment of different grain sizes (mostly very fine and fine sand), and (ii) single motion flow (i.e., either unidirectional or
oscillatory flow) under lower and upper flow regimes (i.e., subcritical and supercritical flows respectively, see discussion later)
(e.g., Gilbert, 1914; Bagnold, 1946; Simons and Richardson, 1966; Allen, 1968, 1977; Komar, 1974; Harms et al., 1975; Miller and
Komar, 1980; Rubin and McCulloch, 1980; Southard and Boguchwal, 1990; Southard et al., 1990; Southard, 1991; Baas, 1994;
Alexander et al., 2001; O’Donoghue and Clubb, 2001; Venditti et al., 2005b, 2016; Dumas and Arnott, 2006; O’Donoghue et al.,
2006; Cummings et al., 2009; Cartigny et al., 2014; Herbert et al., 2015). These experimental approaches enable quantification of
formational processes from initial motion of sediment particles to bedform generation. However, these studies do not recreate
natural conditions because in nature different phases of flow commonly influence bedforms simultaneously and the sediment
being moved typically has variable sorting, roundness, grain size, and cohesiveness, all of which impact their bed phases. Erosion
and subsequent deposition of sediment produces bedforms, and the transport of particles, through suspension, saltation and/or
rolling, is a function of available sediment grain sizes, flow speed, and bed roughness (e.g., Simons and Richardson, 1966; Southard
and Boguchwal, 1990; Southard, 1991).
Fluid flow is either laminar or turbulent. In laminar flow, the net movement of particles follows the downstream motion of the
fluid. In turbulent flow, particle motion is in every direction, but the resulting movement is downstream. Most flows in nearshore
environments are turbulent. Depending on flow velocity, laminar and turbulent flows can also be subcritical or supercritical, and
the value of the Froude number defines the transition between these two flow states. The Froude number is calculated as follows:
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Fr ¼ U= g:h (1)

where U is the flow speed, g is the acceleration due to gravity, and h is water depth. When Fr > 1, inertia dominates over gravity,
meaning that flow velocity is higher than wave celerity (C). Celerity (wave velocity) is provided by the dispersion relation (e.g.,
Landau and Lifshitz, 1987):
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
 ffi
C¼ gL = pÞ tanh 2 ph= (2)
2 L

In shallow water, Eq. (2) can be simplified to:

pffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
C¼ g:h (3)
Then, Eq. (1) can be modified as:
4 Nearshore Bedforms

Fr ¼ U=C (4)
Under subcritical flow conditions (Fr < 1), erosion occurs on the stoss side of bedforms and deposition on the lee side resulting in
downstream migration of the bedform. The opposite occurs when the flow reaches a supercritical state (Fr > 1): erosion occurs on
the lee side and deposition on the stoss side resulting in the upstream migration of bedforms (Figs. 1 and 4).

2.1 Unidirectional flow

Unidirectional flow describes the overall motion of fluid in a single direction. For coarse silt- to pebble-sized sediment in
0.25–0.4 m water depth, there is no motion at flow velocities below 0.15 m s−1 (Fig. 4A), and the threshold velocity (i.e., the
critical shear stress) increases as grain size increases. Finer sediment fractions, fine silt and clay, tend to be cohesive, and the critical
shear stress needed to initiate grain motion is higher than for sand (e.g., Sundborg, 1956). Above the critical shear stress, coarse silt
to coarse sand begins to form small bedforms called ripples (1, Fig. 4), while coarse sand to pebbles accumulate as lower-stage plane
beds (LSPB). With increasing flow velocity, ripples abruptly transition into either dunes (2, 3, Fig. 4) or upper-stage plane beds
(USPB) depending on grain size (4, 5, Fig. 4). Fine sand is the lower grain size limit for dune formation. Ripples and dunes formed
under unidirectional flow are considered asymmetrical (the stoss side is longer than the lee side, Fig. 1) and can have multiple crest
morphologies. The shape of the crests of a bedform can be continuous and straight, continuous or straight, or neither continuous
nor straight, reflecting a transition from 2D, to 2.5D, to 3D morphologies, respectively. The shape of the crest is function of the flow
speed, grain size, and sediment concentration (e.g., Kostaschuk and Villard, 1996; Cummings et al., 2009; Perillo et al., 2014a).
Above 1 m s−1, sediments form either dunes (3, Fig. 4) or USPB (4, 5, Fig. 4).
In addition to flow speed, sediment concentration, and grain size, bedforms also vary with changes in water depth (Fig. 5).
As water depth increases, higher velocity is needed to put in motion sediment of the same grain size (Fig. 5). Also the bed phase in
which supercritical bedforms develop decreases with increasing water depth suggesting that supercritical bedforms are more easily
formed in shallow water (Rubin and McCulloch, 1980; Southard and Boguchwal, 1990).
Supercritical bedforms (6, 7, 8, Fig. 4) start to build when the Froude number defining the flow exceeds 1. For unidirectional
flows (Figs. 4 and 5), the term Antidune was commonly used to define the bedforms phase at Fr > 1; however, here, we refer to them
as Supercritical bedforms to include not only antidunes but also chutes-and-pools and cyclic steps that also form in nearshore
environments (e.g., Broome and Komar, 1979; Kostic et al., 2010; Vaucher et al., 2018a; Slootman and Cartigny, 2020).

2.2 Oscillatory flow

The circular motion of a fluid defines an oscillatory flow and this motion is associated with wave processes in natural environments
(either of low or high energy). The orbital motion of waves at the seafloor is defined by the maximum oscillatory velocity (Uo), the
orbital diameter (do), and the oscillation period (T ). The maximum oscillatory velocity for a sinusoidal wave (e.g., Clifton and
Dingler, 1984) is provided by:

A 2 6, 7 ,8 Supercritical bedforms B
Fr = 1
1 5
Upper Stage Plane Bed ual
grad
Ripples Upper stage plane bed
1
5 3D
abrup 4
0.8 t ual
graddual
Mean flow velocity (m s-1)

3
Dunes gra
0.6
ed
ne B
2
2 6
Pla
2D age Dunes and superposed ripples Antidunes standing waves
abr

r St
upt

0.4 e
Low
Ripples
1

No motion 3 7
0.2
Dunes Antidunes breaking waves

Sediment size (mm) 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 1 2 4

Silt Very fine Fine Medium Coarse Very coarse Granules Pebbles 4 8
Mud Sand Gravel
Mudrock Sandstone Conglomerate Washed out dunes or transition Chute-and-pool

Fig. 4 (A) Bedform stability diagram for unidirectional currents in a flume tank with a water depth of 0.25–0.40 m over a broad spectrum of grain sizes.
(B) Representation of bedforms in cross-section view that form under increasingly energetic unidirectional flow. (A) Adapted from Southard JB (1991) Experimental
determination of bed-form stability. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 19: 423–455; Allen PA (1997) Earth Surface Processes, 404 pp. London, UK:
Blackwell Science, (B) redrawn from Simons DB and Richardson EV (1966) Resistance to flow in alluvial channels, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 422-J.
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
 Nearshore Bedforms 5

Sand: 0.10 - 0.14 mm Sand: 0.40 - 0.50 mm Sand: 1.3 - 1.8 mm

1
0.8 A B C to USPB
USPB
0.6

al

gradual
Dunes

gradual
gradu
No motion USPB No motion Dunes
0.4
No motion

abrupt

abrupt
Ripples
Mean Flow Depth (m)

= 1 84
0.2 2D 3D 2D 3D

Fr = 0.
.0
Fr
0.1
0.08

0.06 Ripples LSPB

= 1 84

=1 4
Fr = 0.8
Fr = 0.
Supercritical Supercritical Supercritical

.0

.0
0.04

Fr

Fr
bedforms bedforms bedforms

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 2.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 2.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 2.0
Unidirectional Velocity (m s-1) Unidirectional Velocity (m s-1) Unidirectional Velocity (m s-1)

Fig. 5 Bedform stability diagrams with varying shallow-water depths and flow velocities of unidirectional currents over (A) very fine- to fine- grained,
(B) medium-grained, and (C) very coarse-grained sand. Modified from Southard JB and Boguchwal LA (1990) Bed configuration in steady unidirectional water flows;
part 2, synthesis of flume data. Journal of Sedimentary Research 60: 658–679.

Uo ¼ Hp=T sinh ð2ph=LÞ (5)

The orbital diameter is dependent of the wave properties and water depth, and is calculated as follows:

do ¼ Uo T=p (6)
Oscillatory motion decreases due to internal friction as water depth increases. In deep water (i.e., below effective fair-weather wave
base), wave motion does not exceed the critical shear stress to mobilize seafloor sediment; in shallower water (i.e., above effective
fair-weather wave base), it does. Consequently, experimental studies of wave-generated bedforms occur under shallow water
conditions to resolve sediment response to oscillatory flow.
Bedform stability diagrams for oscillatory flow (Fig. 6) share similarities with those developed for unidirectional flows.
Specifically, it is possible to form ripples, dunes, and USPB under both oscillatory flow (Fig. 6, Southard, 1991; Cummings et al.,
2009) and unidirectional flow (Fig. 4, Southard, 1991; Allen, 1997). Besides the effects of grain size and oscillatory velocity on
bedform development, the oscillation period (i.e., the duration between two wave fronts) significantly affects the type of bedforms
generated (Fig. 6). Depending on the oscillation period, ripples or dunes directly transition into USPB (Fig. 6).
Bedforms generated under oscillatory flow are classified as orbital, suborbital or anorbital (Inman, 1957; Clifton, 1976;
Doucette, 2000). Orbital bedforms typically develop under small T and display a wavelength proportional to the orbital diameter
of the wave (l ∝ do). Suborbital bedforms correspond to longer T and commonly have a wavelength inversely proportional to the
orbital diameter of waves (l ∝ 1/do). Anorbital bedforms link to larger do and show a wavelength proportional to grain size (l ∝
grain size). Oscillatory flow parameters can be derived from orbital bedforms by the following equation:

l ¼ a do (7)

with a being a dimensionless coefficient with a value of 0.65–0.7 (Komar, 1974; Clifton, 1976; Miller and Komar, 1980; Yang et al.,
2006). Together Eqs. (4)–(7) are of particular interest for sedimentologists as they enable quantification and semi-quantification of
flow conditions and water depth from bedforms preserved in the rock record (e.g., Immenhauser, 2009).

2.3 Combined-flow
Natural environments, especially nearshore environments, typically experience multiple types of flow simultaneously. Unidirec-
tional and oscillatory flows commonly act together, forming combined flow. Compared to flumes studies with unidirectional and
oscillatory flows, combined flow has received less attention (e.g., Arnott and Southard, 1990; Southard, 1991; Dumas et al., 2005;
Perillo et al., 2014a,b). Studies with updated bedform phase stability diagrams include Dumas et al. (2005) and Perillo et al.
(2014a).
Combined-flow experiments were run using fine-grained sand and a range of both unidirectional (Uu) and orbital velocities (Uo)
and wave periods (T ) to assess the respective stability phases of generated bedforms (Fig. 7). Among the three phase stability
diagrams produced (Fig. 7), the periods tested (T ¼ 4–6 s) did not significantly affect bedform phases. Only the stability phase of
2/3D symmetrical ripples extended with increased wave period (Fig. 7C). In a similar fashion to unidirectional and oscillatory
flows, combined flows also produce ripples, dunes, and USPB. Symmetrical and asymmetrical bedforms tend to develop when
Uo  Uu and Uo  Uu, respectively. In every scenario, bedforms preferentially developed 3D crests under combined flows instead of
6 Nearshore Bedforms

Sand: 0.10 - 0.20 mm Sand: 0.5 - 0.65 mm

Maximum orbital
speed Uo (m/s)
A B
USPB
USPB
1.0

0.55
1.7
0.8

0.30
1.0
0

0.17
0. 5
0.6

5
5
Dunes

0 .3

0.10
Dunes

0
0.17
0.4
0.1

5
00

Ripples
3D 0.2
Ripples 2D

No movement No movement
0.1
2 4 6 7 10 2 4 6 7 10
Oscillation period T (s) Oscillation period T (s)

C Very fine-grained sand Coarse-grained sand

Sand: 0.12 mm Sand: 0.8 mm

USPB USPB

oscillatory velocity
2.5/3D SD
superimposed SR
2D SD

2/2.5D SR

No motion No motion

Fig. 6 Bedform stability diagrams under oscillatory currents with variable orbital speed and period over (A) very fine-grained to fine-grained sand and
(B) coarse-grained sand. The gray dashed lines show constant values of equivalent orbital diameter. The black dashed lines denote the wavelengths of bedforms.
Note that 3D bedforms tend to occur preferentially in finer grain sized sand. (C) Scheme illustrating the change in bedforms under similar flow conditions but in very
fine-grained and coarse-grained sand. (A and B) Modified after Southard JB (1991) Experimental determination of bed-form stability. Annual Review of Earth
and Planetary Sciences 19: 423–455, (C) adapted from Cummings DI, Dumas S and Dalrymple RW (2009) Fine-grained versus coarse-grained wave ripples
generated experimentally under large-scale oscillatory flow. Journal of Sedimentary Research 79: 83–93.

2D crests because of the instabilities produced by the flow (Fig. 7). From these experiments at constant water depth, Perillo et al.
(2014a) adapted Eqs. (6) and (7) for combined-flow as follows:

do+ ¼ ðUo + Uu ÞT=p (8)

and

l ¼ a do+ (9)

where do+ is the horizontal water displacement related to the combined flow with a having a value of 0.82.

3 Bedform distributions

“If the flow changes with time, the bed configuration adjusts in response. In natural flows, equilibrium between the bed and the
flow is the exception rather than the rule; usually the bed configuration lags behind the change in the flow” (Southard, 1991, p.
427). This statement denotes that natural environments are complex in terms of hydrodynamic processes and resulting bedform
patterns; the latter continuously changes as flows change (Myrow et al., 2018; Perron et al., 2018). Flow complexity, especially in
nearshore environments, comes from the interaction of wave-, tide-, and river-induced currents. Besides their spatial variability (e.g.,
close to a river mouth, sheltered or open environments), currents also vary temporally (e.g., currents during fairweather vs. storm
conditions, floods, or throughout a tide cycle).
 Nearshore Bedforms 7

Velocity, Uo (m s-1)

Velocity, Uo (m s-1)
Sand: 0.25 mm Period: 4.0 sec Sand: 0.25 mm Period: 5.0 sec Sand: 0.25 mm Period: 6.0 sec

Maximum Orbital

Maximum Orbital
A B C

1.0 1.0

3D SD 3D SD 3D SD
0.8 0.8
USPB USPB USPB
? ? ?
0.6 0.6
? ?

0.4 0.4

2D/3D SR
2D/3D SR

2D/3D SR
3D 3D AD 3D 3D AD 3D 3D AD
QAR/AR QAR/AR QAR/AR
? 0.2 ? 0.2 ?

3D CD 3D CD 3D CD
NM 3D CR NM 3D CR NM 3D CR
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4
Unidirectional Velocity, Uu (m s-1) Unidirectional Velocity, Uu (m s-1) Unidirectional Velocity, Uu (m s-1)

60 cm

NM 2D SR 3D SR 3D SD

3D AR 3D AD 3D CR USPB

Fig. 7 Bedform stability diagram for combined flow with variable unidirectional and orbital velocities over fine-grained sand and with wave periods of
(A) T ¼ 4.0 s, (B) T ¼ 5.0 s, and (C) T ¼ 6.0 s. The photos below the graphs are of the bedforms generated in the tank and listed on the three graphs. Dashed lines
are gradational transitions and solid lines are abrupt transitions. Note that 2D bedforms rarely form and only when unidirectional velocity is minimal; their phase of
stability increase with wave period (T). NM, no motion; USPB, upper-stage plane beds; SR, symmetric ripples; CD, current dunes; AR, asymmetric ripples; QAR,
quasi-asymmetric ripples; AD, asymmetric dunes; SD, symmetric dunes. The scale is the same for each picture. Modified from Perillo MM, Best J and Garcia MH
(2014a) A new phase diagram for combined-flow bedforms. Journal of Sedimentary Research 84: 301–313.

While spatio-temporal variations in currents directly affect the development of bedforms in natural, nearshore environments,
biological agents also exert a significant influence. For example, flume studies were mostly done using non-cohesive substrates, and
results are applicable to a wide range of nearshore environments. However, both clay and extracellular polymeric substances (EPS;
i.e., a sticky substance secreted by microorganisms) in sandy sediments significantly affect bedform development. At identical flow
conditions, both the wavelength and the height of bedforms decreases with increasing clay and/or EPS content (e.g., Schieber et al.,
2007; Schieber and Southard, 2009; Baas et al., 2016, 2019; Malarkey et al., 2015; Parsons et al., 2016). This underlines that the
cohesive nature of the sediment may affect all bedform phases and further work is needed to resolve the implications of this for
nearshore environments.

3.1 Ripples
Ripples are the smallest type of bedform in terms of both wavelength and height. They are generated under relatively slow
unidirectional, oscillatory, or combined flow velocities over a wide range of water depths and grain sizes (Figs. 4–7); this makes
them ubiquitous in nearshore environments and across wave zones (Fig. 8) (Southard and Boguchwal, 1990; Southard, 1991;
Dumas et al., 2005; Clifton, 2006; Greenwood, 2006; Perillo et al., 2014a; Baas et al., 2016). Ripple patterns increase in complexity
with decreasing water depth. In the outer part of the nearshore, ripples are more commonly symmetric to quasi-asymmetric,
wave-formed, and with crests parallel to the direction of wave approach (normally parallel to the shoreline). If ripples are
8 Nearshore Bedforms

A 2D SR B 2D SR C 2D AR

10 cm 10 cm 5 cm

D 2D CR E 2D CR

F 3D CR G 2.5D SR H 2D SR

I 2D CR + 2D SR J 2D CR + 2D CR K 2D SR + 2.5D CR

20 cm

Fig. 8 Ripples observed underwater in the nearshore or exposed foreshores at low tide. Seaward direction is to the right side of the pictures unless otherwise
indicated. White arrows mark defects in ripple crests. (A) 2D SR in fine- to medium-grained sand at 3 m water depth (North Bimini Island, Bahamas). (B) 2D SR of
various wavelengths and direction due to the presence of a boulder (boulder shadow in the top left corner) in fine- to medium-grained carbonate sand at 3 m water
depth (Baisha Bay, Taiwan). The seaward direction is toward the boulder. (C) 2D AR in fine- to medium-grained sand at 1 m water depth (North Bimini Island,
Bahamas). (D) Mostly 2D CR with minor 3D CR in clay to slit exposed at low tide at a channel-to-lower delta plain tidal flat transition (Canoe Pass, Fraser Delta,
Canada). Dark organic material infills ripple troughs. (E) 2D CR in muddy sand occurring seaward of the ripples in (D). (F) 3D CR in medium-grained sand occurring
adjacently to (E). (G) 2D SR in muddy sand exposed in a mix-tidal flat (Iona Beach, lower delta plain tidal flat, Fraser Delta, Canada). (H) 2D SR in fine-grained sand in
a sand flat (Noosaville, Australia). (I) 2D CR overtopped by 2D SR orthogonal to 2D CR in fine- to medium-grained sand (Plage du Truc Vert, France). (J) Two sets of
orthogonal 2D SR in medium sand across the intertidal zone (Berck-Plage, France). White scale bar: 50 cm. (K) 2D SR and 2.5D CR in muddy sand in a mix-tidal flat
(Iona Beach, lower delta plain tidal flat, Fraser Delta, Canada). SR: symmetrical ripples; CR, current ripples; AR, asymmetrical ripples. The increments on scale bars
are in cm.

asymmetric, the steeper side denotes the direction of migration (normally landward following the water motion) and the
asymmetry increases throughout the nearshore. Defects (sensu Myrow et al., 2018) of ripple crest lines are common and are include
bifurcations (Fig. 8A, B, E and H) or zigzags (Fig. 8G). These defects denote bedform disequilibrium and record bedforms adapting to
flow variations (Myrow et al., 2018; Perron et al., 2018) such as increasing or decreasing wave period.
 Nearshore Bedforms 9

In the most proximal part of the nearshore, wave-, tide-, and river-processes, and related currents act together or individually,
forming broad rippled plains (Fig. 8). In shallow waters of the surf zone, symmetrical (Fig. 8A and B) and asymmetrical wave ripples
(Fig. 8C) form. Symmetrical wave ripples are generated under dominantly oscillatory flow and record the relatively low energy of
incoming waves. In contrast, if wave energy increases, the interaction between wave orbital motion and seafloor sediment increases
and the flow becomes combined and directed landward rather than oscillatory. The combined flow leads to the formation of
asymmetric wave ripples (Fig. 8C) in the surf-zone. In nearshore environments subject to strong uni(bi)directional flows (tides,
rivers), 2D and 3D currents ripples can form over muddy to sandy sediments (Fig. 8D–F). In nearshore settings with strong tidal
influence, symmetrical wave ripples also can form either during high tide or the early stage of the falling tide (Fig. 8G and H)
through a relatively low oscillatory motion. The preservation of wave ripples at low tide suggests that during the ebb, unidirectional
flow velocity was low enough to not modify pre-existing wave ripples (Fig. 8G and H) suggesting that no motion of the sediment
occurred during the latest stage of the falling tide.
Interference ripples (Fig. 8I–K, also called ladderback or cross ripples) are common in nearshore environments and denote the
co-occurrence of two sets of ripples without referring to a specific type of flow. Generally, one set of ripples is better expressed than
the other (Fig. 8I). The main ripple set is typically well defined and tends to have continuous crests. The secondary ripple set
commonly exhibits discontinuous crests and forms in the troughs of the main ripple set. Such patterns tend to develop under one of
the following conditions: (i) a significant tidal range affects the nearshore and ripples form at different tidal stages when currents
have different orientations, (ii) an alongshore current (either due to oblique wind-blown swells or wave reflection) acts concom-
itantly with incident waves, and/or (iii) the occurrence of different wave sets propagating at the same time, but with different
directions induced by non-linear shorelines (Inman, 1957; Picard and High, 1970; Clifton et al., 1971; Reineck and Singh, 1973;
Clifton, 1976; Allen, 1982; Davis, 1985; Ramsay et al., 1989; Doucette, 2000; Vaucher et al., 2018a,b). In most cases, ripples crests
tend to be orthogonal to the flow direction.

3.2 Dunes
Dunes are large bedforms produced mainly in sediment with grain sizes greater than medium-grained sand (Figs. 4–7). Symmetrical
dunes (either 2D or 3D) can form under high oscillatory currents in nearshore environments (Figs. 6 and 7), but this bed phase
preferentially occurs under storm conditions during which higher orbital velocities are reached (Harms, 1979; Greenwood and
Sherman, 1986; Sherman and Greenwood, 1989; Dumas et al., 2005; Dumas and Arnott, 2006; Yang et al., 2006; Cummings et al.,
2009; Perillo et al., 2014a). Storm-induced 2D and 3D symmetrical dunes in nearshore environments are rarely preserved because
the return of fairweather conditions after the storm changes the bed phase and tends to modify symmetrical dunes into other types
of bedforms (e.g., Cummings et al., 2009). Low-amplitude symmetrical dunes can also form under unidirectional flow if there is a
high sediment concentration, and these bedforms have been reported in fluvial and fluvio-tidal settings (e.g., Kostaschuk and
Villard, 1996; Bradley and Venditti, 2017). The mechanism behind low-amplitude symmetrical dunes remains elusive, although
sediment bypassing the lee side followed by deposition in the troughs of the dune is considered as the main factor promoting their
formation (e.g., Kostaschuk and Villard, 1996; Bradley and Venditti, 2017).
Asymmetrical dunes formed under both unidirectional and combined flows occur widely in nearshore environments with a
wavelength that can vary by one order of magnitude (Fig. 9). Dunes fields migrating landward can form in the shoaling zone if the
required conditions are met (Figs. 4–7). In the surf zone, flow can occur in multiple directions due to the coupled action of waves,
tides and rivers. After waves break, they can reform with an asymmetrical, turbulent motion directed onshore and these flows
produce onshore-directed, asymmetrical dunes in the surf zone (Fig. 2; e.g., Clifton et al., 1971; Clifton, 2006). Turbulent
wave-forced currents can also develop from waves approaching the shoreline obliquely, and produce alongshore and rip currents.
Alongshore currents result from water being driven by oblique-to-shore wave sets and their motion, and the orientation of dunes
produced by alongshore currents is parallel to the shoreline. Rip currents are offshore-directed, and are fed by alongshore currents;
they produce offshore-directed dunes (e.g., Komar, 1971; Sherman et al., 1993; Brander and MacMahan, 2011; Earle, 2015). Tidal
currents can enhance alongshore and rip currents. In the most proximal part of nearshore environments, dunes are commonly
asymmetric to quasi asymmetric and form under combined flow associated with dominant uni(bi)directional currents such as rip
(Fig. 9A), tidal or fluvial-tidal currents (Fig. 9B–D) (Clifton et al., 1971; Dalrymple and Rhodes, 1995; Doucette, 2000; Gallagher,
2003; Clifton, 2006). In nearshore environments dominated by tidal currents, dunes commonly develop following the ebb and/or
flood stages of the tidal cycle (e.g., Dalrymple and Rhodes, 1995).
Dunes are frequently found with superimposed ripples (Fig. 9) as both bedforms develop in fine-grained through to
coarse-grained sand. While ripples and dunes co-occur, it is does not necessarily mean that they form simultaneously since they
correspond to different bed phases (Greenwood and Sherman, 1986; Southard and Boguchwal, 1990; Southard, 1991; Dumas et al.,
2005; Cummings et al., 2009; Perillo et al., 2014a) (Figs. 4–7). The superimposition of bedforms may also link to boundary layers
generated by large bedforms (e.g., dunes) that promote the development of smaller bedforms (e.g., ripples) on their top, and
suggest that a non-negligible part of dune migration is due to ripple migration (e.g., Rubin and McCulloch, 1980; Venditti et al.,
2005a; Guerrero and Guillén, 2020).
10 Nearshore Bedforms

A
Atlantic Ocean

USPB

Dune

B Vancouver Island
Strait of Georgia Gulf Islands

Fraser River

10 m
D

Fig. 8F

Fig. 8E
10 m

Fig. 9 (A) 3D Dunes with superimposed ripples of different bed phases and USPB in a channel (baïnes) oblique to the shoreline (Plage du Truc Vert, France). (B–D)
Are from a channel-margin bar formed at the transition from the channel to lower delta plain tidal flat (Canoe Pass, Fraser Delta, Canada). (B) Sandy dune fields and
ripples migrating over a mud flat. (C) Transversal dunes with quasi continuous crests overtopped by 3D CR. (D) 3D dunes overtopped by 3D CR. Arrows indicate the
migration/ebb direction. CR, current ripples; USPB, upper-stage plane beds.
 Nearshore Bedforms 11

A B USPB

USPB
(relics of 2D S/CR)

USPB

C D
USPB
USPB (relics of 2D and 3D ripples)

USPB and USPB

supercritical bedforms
parting lineations
rill marks 10 cm

Fig. 10 (A) USPB in medium-grained sand in the swash zone (Iona Beach, lower delta plain tidal flat, Fraser Delta, Canada). The increments on the scale bar are
in cm. (B) USPB and relics of 2D S/CR in medium-grained sand of a channel (baïnes) oblique to the shoreline. (C) Intertidal zone with USPB in its upper limit
(top left corner), and USPB and supercritical bedforms in the central intertidal zone in medium-grained sand (China Beach, Vancouver Island, Canada). Note the two
people in the upper left corner for scale. (D) USPB formed over 2D and 3D ripples in medium-grained sand (San Josef Bay, Vancouver Island, Canada). SR,
symmetrical ripples; CR, current ripples; USPB, upper-stage plane beds.

3.3 Upper-stage plane beds

USPB are bedforms (Fig. 10) that dominates most foreshore (beach) environments globally, and USPB result from the swash and
backwash of waves at their landward terminus (Clifton et al., 1971; Shipp, 1984; Doucette, 2000; Clifton, 2006). USPB on the beach
dip gently seaward (1–10 ) (Fig. 10A and B), and both coarser-grained sediment and high incoming wave energy tends to increase
dip (e.g., McCubbin, 1981; Saito, 2005). In high-energy non-barred nearshore environments that consist of fine-grained sand, the
zone of USPB can extend to the nearshore-offshore limit (Clifton et al., 1971; Clifton, 2006). In medium- to coarse-grained
nearshores, longshore bars frequently develop in the middle and upper shoreface and form parallel to the shoreline (Fig. 2). In the
case of a barred nearshore, the outermost bars generally correspond to the breaking-wave zone (Aagaard et al., 2013). When waves
break, if the orbital velocity is high enough, USPB are developed on bars (Clifton, 2006). In non-tidal nearshore environments, the
position of the shoreline remains relatively the same. However, in tidal settings, the position of the shoreline shifts cyclically which
shifts the zone in which USPB forms; consequently, USPB can form by modifying (flattening) pre-existing ripples and dunes
(Fig. 10B–D) (Dashtgard et al., 2009, 2021; Vaucher et al., 2018b).

3.4 Supercritical bedforms

Supercritical conditions are commonly reached at the surf-swash transition (e.g., Butt and Russell, 2005; Brocchini and Baldock,
2008) generating supercritical bedforms (Figs. 11 and 12) (Broome and Komar, 1979; Vaucher et al., 2018a). As well, antidunes
frequently occur in ephemeral and confined streams on the beach (e.g., Yagishita, 1995). When exposed, supercritical bedforms can
be misinterpreted based solely on their shapes, and may be classified as either ripples or dunes depending on their scale (Alexander
et al., 2001; Cartigny et al., 2014; Vaucher et al., 2018a).
Supercritical bedforms in the proximal nearshore typically form via backwash flow when it reaches supercritical conditions
(Broome and Komar, 1979; Vaucher et al., 2018a). In non-tidal settings it is difficult to describe and interpret them because of non-
12 Nearshore Bedforms

A S D S

Backwash
USPB

parting lineation
Fr<1

Fr>1
Fr<1 hydraulic jumps
Relics Fr>1
Fr<1

t: 0s L t: 4.1 s L

B S E S

Backwash

Fr<1
Fr>1
Initiation of
Fr<1
Swash Fr>1
supercitical bedforms
Fr<1

t: 1.5 s L t: 4.3 s L

C S F S

Backwash

Backwash initiation

Supercritical
initiation of
bedforms
hydraulic jumps

t: 3.5 s L t: 5.7 s L

Fig. 11 Time series of 5.7 s showing an incoming swash followed by its backwash forming USPB and supercritical bedforms in fine- to medium-grained sand
(Sandcut Beach, Vancouver Island, Canada). The orientation of the swash and backwash, and the estimated Froude (Fr) number of the flow are shown. L, landward;
S, seaward; t, time. Images were acquired using a drone DJI Mavic Pro 2. Scale bar: 1 m.

exposure. As the tidal range increases, the width of the foreshore increases making macrotidal and megatidal settings preferential
sites to assess supercritical bedforms exposed at low tide (Figs. 11 and 12). On relatively low-angle beach slopes the swash zone is
wider and slight depth variations (e.g., bedform relics) are sufficient to repeatedly switch the swash and backwash between
supercritical and subcritical conditions; this forms low-amplitude antidunes and USPB, respectively (Fig. 11). The troughs of
antidunes are underlined by the positions of hydraulic jumps when submerged (Fig. 11C and D). Conversely, on steeper beach
slopes with medium- to coarse-grained sand with high-energy incoming waves, larger supercritical bedforms can develop (Fig. 12).
Supercritical bedforms like ripples and dunes can develop 2D and 3D patterns (Figs. 11 and 12). In nearshore environments, the
decrease in water depth leads to wave refraction (see Eq. 2), implying that incoming wave crests tend to parallel to the shoreline
(Fig. 12A). However, when a non-linear coastline or highly angular incident waves occur, the refraction of incident waves is not
always complete and waves may reflect (e.g., Yu and Mei, 2000; Ardhuin and Roland, 2012; Earle, 2015; Vaucher et al., 2018a)
(Fig. 12B). This phenomenon implies that wave swash can be oblique to the beach (Fig. 12B) instead of being orthogonal to it
(Fig. 12A). The oblique swash of waves leads to their reflection resulting in swash and backwash having distinct directions
(Fig. 12B). This wave reflection tends to form 3D instead of 2D supercritical bedforms, and this is accentuated during storm
conditions when higher energy waves occur (Figs. 11 and 12A) (Vaucher et al., 2018a).
 Nearshore Bedforms 13

A 2D Flow orientation
Incident othogonal wave swash Swash Land Backwash

Land

2D bedforms
Sea
Sea

B 3D Flow orientation
Incident angular wave swash Swash Land Backwash

Land

3D bedforms Sea
Sea

Fig. 12 Supercritical bedforms formed at the surf-swash transition zone observed at low tide. White arrows point seaward. (A) Large, 2D supercritical bedforms in
medium-grained sand overtopped by small ripples in their troughs (Pointe Espagnole, France). The 2D morphology is linked to the orthogonal swash (blue lines) and
backwash (brown lines) of waves. White scale bar: 50 cm. (B) Large, 3D bedforms in medium-grained sand overtopped by 2D S/CR (Cap Ferret, France). These large
3D bedforms developed under supercritical flow conditions and the 3D aspect is related to the angular incidence of waves. Waves swash (blue lines) is oblique to the
shoreline leading to a reflection of the backwash (brown lines). (A) and (B) Both externally mimic dunes that could be formed either by unidirectional, oscillatory
and/or combined flows under subcritical conditions; however, supercritical flows occurred at the time of their formation, and their internal structures manifest this.
Both schemes are adapted from Vaucher R, Pittet B, Humbert T and Ferry S (2018a) Large-scale bedforms induced by supercritical flows and wave–wave
interference in the intertidal zone (Cap Ferret, France). Geo-Marine Letters 38: 287–305.

4 Tide modulation of bedform distributions

In non-tidal and microtidal settings, the null to low tidal range does not significantly affect bedform distributions across the
nearshore. However, in nearshore environments subject to macro- and mega-tidal ranges, the significant tide amplitude shifts wave
zones (shoaling, breaking, surf, swash, Fig. 2) continuously across the nearshore profile. For example, during high tide, the outer
part of the nearshore is under the influence of shoaling/breaking processes, whereas surf/swash occurs in more proximal positions
(Fig. 2). At low tide, part of the nearshore is exposed, and surf/swash processes take place in the outer part where shoaling/breaking
processes acted during high tide (Masselink and Short, 1993; Masselink and Hegge, 1995). The repeated shift of wave zones across
the nearshore following tidal cycles generates complex bedform patterns with various superimpositions of bedform phases
(Fig. 13A) (Chauhan, 2000; Dashtgard et al., 2009, 2012, 2021; Vaucher et al., 2018a,b). An example along a wave-dominated
tide-modulated nearshore (Vaucher et al., 2018b) defined by multiple intertidal bars (e.g., Kroon and Masselink, 2002; Biausque
et al., 2020) is shown in Fig. 13. Topographic highs (bars) are dominated by bedforms linked to high velocity flows (USPB and
supercritical bedforms). In contrast, topographic lows (troughs) display multiple generations of bedforms developed under
variable, reduced flow velocities and correspond to different bed phases (ripples and dunes, Fig. 13B and C) (Vaucher et al.,
2018b). The different bed phases are influenced by varying water levels during the tidal cycle, incoming wave energy, and bed
topography. In non-barred nearshores subject to macro- or mega-tidal regimes, similar across-shore translation occurs, but the
repeated bedform pattern shown in Fig. 13 is not developed (Dashtgard et al., 2009). Indeed, in the case of a barred-shoreline, the
bars act as a “barrier” protecting and preserving bedforms in their landward associated runnel.

5 Summary and conclusions

Bedforms are transient features that develop at the fluid-sediment interface when the shear stress generated by the flow is greater
than the critical shear stress required to put sediment in motion. In nearshore environments, the fluid responsible for bedform
generation is mainly water, and its motion is defined as unidirectional-, oscillatory- or combined-flow. Bedforms with topography
(i.e., ripples, dunes, and supercritical bedforms) can be symmetric, quasi-asymmetric, or asymmetric with their crests continuous
and straight (2D), continuous or straight (2.5D), or neither continuous nor straight (3D). The variability in bedform geometries
occurs in response to variations in flow velocity, flow type, and sediment properties. In nearshore settings, symmetrical bedforms
form mainly under dominantly oscillatory flow, whereas quasi-asymmetric and asymmetric bedforms form under combined flow
14 Nearshore Bedforms

A High tide
3D SD

3D SD 2D SR
3D SD

B
USP
SR
2D
USPB
2D SR
3D SD
Low tide

B Photo mosaic C Map of bedforms

highest tide beach highest tide beach

A A

Ebb flow trajectory

0 75 150 m

Residual Water 3D CR 3D AR 2/2.5D SR 2D SB USPB 3D SD 2D SD

Fig. 13 Bedform patterns and distribution across a wave-dominated tide-modulated nearshore with multiple intertidal bars (Berck-Plage, France). (A) 3D SD
overprinted by 2D SR in the thoughs and USPB on the crests. The superimposition of distinct bedforms records changes in bed phases through the falling tide. White
scale bar: 50 cm. Ortho-images (B) and bedform distribution (C) across the intertidal zone. Tidal range is megatidal. Note that upper flow regime bedforms
(UPSB and supercritical bedforms) occur on the top of bars, whereas lower flow regime bedforms are found in the troughs between bars. CR: current ripples; AR,
asymmetrical ripples; SR, symmetrical ripples; SB, supercritical bedforms; USPB, upper-stage plane beds; SD, symmetrical dunes. Modified from Vaucher R,
Pittet B, Passot S, Grandjean P, Humbert T and Allemand P (2018b) Bedforms in a tidally modulated ridge and runnel shoreface (Berck-Plage; North France):
Implications for the geological record. BSGF - Earth Sciences Bulletin 189: 5.
 Nearshore Bedforms 15

and unidirectional flow. Two-dimensional bedforms commonly develop at lower flow velocity than 3D bedforms; however,
combined flow and wave reflection both tend to prevent the development of 2D bedform geometries.
Waves, tides, and rivers are the main processes affecting the nearshore and water motion induced by these three processes
includes, unidirectional, oscillatory and combined flow. Four types of bedforms occur commonly in nearshore environments:
ripples, dunes, upper-stage plane beds, and supercritical bedforms. The types of bedforms do not link to water depth or
subenvironments within nearshore settings, but instead are related to bed phase. However, within any single nearshore environ-
ment, bed phases are relatively stable under fairweather conditions with predictable bedform zonation in the shoaling, breaking,
surf, and swash zones. These wave zones fluctuate both spatially and temporally under the influence of tides as tidal cyclicity shifts
wave zone positions across-shore, which results in the modification and superimposition of bedforms across the nearshore with the
rising and falling tide.

References
Aagaard T, Greenwood B, and Hughes M (2013) Sediment transport on dissipative, intermediate and reflective beaches. Earth-Science Reviews 124: 32–50.
Alexander J, Bridge JS, Cheel RJ, and Leclair SF (2001) Bedforms and associated sedimentary structures formed under supercritical water flows over aggrading sand beds.
Sedimentology 48: 133–152.
Allen JRL (1968) The nature and origin of bed-form hierarchies. Sedimentology 10: 161–182.
Allen JRL (1977) The plan shape of current ripples in relation to flow conditions. Sedimentology 24: 53–62.
Allen JRL (1982) Sedimentary Structures: Their Character and Physical Basis. vol. 1. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Allen PA (1997) Earth Surface Processes. London, UK: Blackwell Science. 404 pp.
Anthony EJ and Aagaard T (2020) The lower shoreface: Morphodynamics and sediment connectivity with the upper shoreface and beach. Earth-Science Reviews 210: 103334.
Ardhuin F and Roland A (2012) Coastal wave reflection, directional spread, and seismoacoustic noise sources. Journal of Geophysical Research 117. https://doi.org/
10.1029/2011JC007832. C00J20.
Arnott RW and Southard JB (1990) Exploratory flow-duct experiments on combined-flow bed configurations, and some implications for interpreting storm-event stratification. Journal of
Sedimentary Research 60: 211–219.
Baas JH (1994) A flume study on the development and equilibrium morphology of current ripples in very fine sand. Sedimentology 41: 185–209.
Baas JH, Best JL, and Peakall J (2016) Predicting bedforms and primary current stratification in cohesive mixtures of mud and sand. Journal of the Geological Society 173: 12–45.
Baas JH, Baker ML, Malarkey J, Bass SJ, Manning AJ, Hope JA, Peakall J, Lichtman ID, Ye L, Davies AG, Parsons DR, Paterson DM, and Thorne PD (2019) Integrating field and
laboratory approaches for ripple development in mixed sand-clay-EPS. Sedimentology 66: 2749–2768.
Bagnold RA (1946) Motion of waves in shallow water. Interaction between waves and sand bottoms. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series A 187: 1–15.
Beji S and Battjes JA (1993) Experimental investigation of wave propagation over a bar. Coastal Engineering 19: 151–162.
Biausque M, Grottoli E, Jackson DWT, and Cooper JAG (2020) Multiple intertidal bars on beaches: A review. Earth-Science Reviews, 103358.
Bradley RW and Venditti JG (2017) Reevaluating dune scaling relations. Earth-Science Reviews 165: 356–376.
Brander R and MacMahan J (2011) Future challenges for rip current research and outreach. In: Leatherman S and Fletemeyer J (eds.) Rip Currents, pp. 1–29. Beach Safety: Physical
Oceanography and Wave Modeling, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Brocchini M and Baldock TE (2008) Recent advances in modeling swash zone dynamics: Influence of surf-swash interaction on nearshore hydrodynamics and morphodynamics.
Reviews of Geophysics 46: , RG3003.
Broome R and Komar PD (1979) Undular hydraulic jumps and the formation of backlash ripples on beaches. Sedimentology 26: 543–559.
Butt T and Russell P (2005) Observations of hydraulic jumps in High-energy swash. Journal of Coastal Research 216: 1219–1227.
Cartigny MJB, Ventra D, Postma G, and van Den Berg JH (2014) Morphodynamics and sedimentary structures of bedforms under supercritical-flow conditions: New insights from
flume experiments. Sedimentology 61: 712–748.
Chauhan PPS (2000) Bedform association on a ridge and runnel foreshore: Implications for the hydrography of a Macrotidal Estuarine Beach. Journal of Coastal Research
16: 1011–1021.
Clifton HE (1976) Wave-generated structures: A conceptual model. In: Davis JRA and Ethrington RL (eds.) Beach and Nearshore Processes, pp. 126–148. Tulsa, Oklahoma: Society of
Economic Paleontologists and Mineralogists, Special Publication.
Clifton HE (2006) A re-examination of facies models for clastic shorelines. In: Posamentier HW and Walker RG (eds.) Facies Model Revisited. vol. 84, pp. 293–337. SEPM, Special
Publication.
Clifton HE and Dingler JR (1984) Wave-formed structures and paleoenvironmental reconstruction. In: Greenwood B and Davis RA (eds.) Developments in Sedimentology, pp. 165–198.
Elsevier.
Clifton HE, Hunter RE, and Phillips RL (1971) Depositional structures and processes in the non-barred high-energy nearshore. Journal of Sedimentary Research 41: 651–670.
Cummings DI, Dumas S, and Dalrymple RW (2009) Fine-grained versus coarse-grained wave ripples generated experimentally under large-scale oscillatory flow. Journal of
Sedimentary Research 79: 83–93.
Dally WR (2005) Surf zone processes. In: Schwartz ML (ed.) Encyclopedia of Coastal Science, pp. 929–935. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
Dalrymple RW and Rhodes RN (1995) Chapter 13 estuarine dunes and bars. In: Perillo GME (ed.) Developments in Sedimentology, pp. 359–422. Elsevier.
Dalrymple RW, Zaitlin BA, and Boyd R (1992) Estuarine facies models; conceptual basis and stratigraphic implications. Journal of Sedimentary Research 62: 1130–1146.
Dashtgard SE, Gingras MK, and MacEachern JA (2009) Tidally modulated shorefaces. Journal of Sedimentary Research 79: 793–807.
Dashtgard SE, MacEachern JA, Frey SE, and Gingras MK (2012) Tidal effects on the shoreface: Towards a conceptual framework. Sedimentary Geology 279: 42–61.
Dashtgard SE, Vaucher R, Yang B, and Dalrymple RW (2021) Hutchison Medallist 1. Wave-dominated to tide-dominated coastal systems: A unifying model for tidal Shorefaces and
refinement of the coastal- environments classification scheme. Geoscience Canada 48: 5–22.
Davidson-Arnott R (2009) Introduction to Coastal Processes and Geomorphology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Davidson-Arnott RGD and Greenwood B (1974) Bedforms and structures associated with bar and trough topography in the shallow-water wave environment, Kouchibouguac Bay, New
Brunswick, Canada. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 44: 698–704.
Davis RA (1985) Coastal sedimentary environments. In: Davis RA (ed.) Coastal Sedimentary Environments. New York, NY: Springer.
Doucette JS (2000) The distribution of nearshore bedforms and effects on sand suspension on low-energy, micro-tidal beaches in southwestern Australia. Marine Geology
165: 41–61.
Dumas S and Arnott RWC (2006) Origin of hummocky and swaley cross-stratification—The controlling influence of unidirectional current strength and aggradation rate. Geology
34: 1073–1076.
Dumas S, Arnott RWC, and Southard JB (2005) Experiments on oscillatory-flow and combined-flow bed forms: Implications for interpreting parts of the shallow-marine sedimentary
record. Journal of Sedimentary Research 75: 501–513.
16 Nearshore Bedforms

Earle S (2015) Physical Geology. Victoria, B.C.: BCcampus.

Gallagher EL (2003) A note on megaripples in the surf zone: Evidence for their relation to steady flow dunes. Marine Geology 193: 171–176.
Galvin CJ Jr. (1968) Breaker type classification on three laboratory beaches. Journal of Geophysical Research (1896–1977) 73: 3651–3659.
Gilbert GK (1914) The transportation of debris by running water. United States Geological Survey. Professional Paper 86: 263.
Greenwood B (2006) Bimodal cross-lamination in wave-ripple form sets: A possible origin. Journal of Coastal Research 22: 1220–1229.
Greenwood B and Sherman DJ (1986) Hummocky cross-stratification in the surf zone: Flow parameters and bedding genesis. Sedimentology 33: 33–45.
Guerrero Q and Guillén J (2020) Dynamics of ripples superimposed on a sand ridge on a tideless shoreface. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 242: 106826.
Harms J (1979) Primary sedimentary structures. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 7: 227.
Harms JC, Southard JB, Spearing DR, and Walker RG (1975) Depositional Environments as Interpreted From Primary Sedimentary Structures and Stratification Sequences. SEPM
Society for Sedimentary Geology.
Herbert C, Alexander J, and Álvaro M (2015) Back-flow ripples in troughs downstream of unit bars: Formation, preservation and value for interpreting flow conditions. Sedimentology
62: 1814–1836.
Immenhauser A (2009) Estimating palaeo-water depth from the physical rock record. Earth-Science Reviews 96: 107–139.
Inman DL (1957) Wave-generated ripples in nearshore sands. In: US Army Corps Eng. Tech. 100.
Komar PD (1971) Nearshore cell circulation and the formation of Giant Cusps. GSA Bulletin 82: 2643–2650.
Komar PD (1974) Oscillatory ripple marks and the evaluation of ancient wave conditions and environments. Journal of Sedimentary Research 44: 169–180.
Kostaschuk R and Villard P (1996) Flow and sediment transport over large subaqueous dunes: Fraser River, Canada. Sedimentology 43: 849–863.
Kostic S, Sequeiros O, Spinewine B, and Parker G (2010) Cyclic steps: A phenomenon of supercritical shallow flow from the high mountains to the bottom of the ocean. Journal of
Hydro-Environment Research 3: 167–172.
Kroon A and Masselink G (2002) Morphodynamics of intertidal bar morphology on a macrotidal beach under low-energy wave conditions, North Lincolnshire, England. Marine Geology
190: 591–608.
Landau L and Lifshitz E (1987) Fluid mechanics. Courses of Theoretical Physics. 2nd edn. vol. 6. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Li MZ and Amos CL (1999) Field observations of bedforms and sediment transport thresholds of fine sand under combined waves and currents. Marine Geology 158: 147–160.
Mahon RC and McElroy B (2018) Indirect estimation of bedload flux from modern sand-bed rivers and ancient fluvial strata. Geology 46: 579–582.
Malarkey J, Baas JH, Hope JA, Aspden RJ, Parsons DR, Peakall J, Paterson DM, Schindler RJ, Ye L, Lichtman ID, Bass SJ, Davies AG, Manning AJ, and Thorne PD (2015) The
pervasive role of biological cohesion in bedform development. Nature Communications 6: 6257.
Masselink G and Hegge BJ (1995) Morphodynamics of meso- and macrotidal beaches. Examples from Central Queensland. Marine Geology 129: 1–23.
Masselink G and Puleo JA (2006) Swash-zone morphodynamics. Continental Shelf Research 26: 661–680.
Masselink G and Short AD (1993) The effect of tidal range on beach morphodynamics and morphology: A conceptual beach model. Journal of Coastal Research 9: 785–800.
McCubbin DG (1981) Barrier-island and strand-plain facies. In: Scholle PA and Spearing D (eds.) Sandstone Depositional Environments. vol. 31, pp. 247–279. AAPG Memoir.
Miller MC and Komar PD (1980) A field investigation of the relationship between oscillation ripple spacinng and the near-bottom water orbital motions. Journal of Sedimentary Research
50: 183–191.
Myrow PM, Jerolmack DJ, and Perron JT (2018) Bedform disequilibrium. Journal of Sedimentary Research 88: 1096–1113.
O’Donoghue T and Clubb GS (2001) Sand ripples generated by regular oscillatory flow. Coastal Engineering 44: 101–115.
O’Donoghue T, Doucette JS, van der Werf JJ, and Ribberink JS (2006) The dimensions of sand ripples in full-scale oscillatory flows. Coastal Engineering 53: 997–1012.
Osborne PD and Vincent CE (1993) Dynamics of large and small scale bedforms on a macrotidal shoreface under shoaling and breaking waves. Marine Geology 115: 207–226.
Parsons DR, Schindler RJ, Hope JA, Malarkey J, Baas JH, Peakall J, Manning AJ, Ye L, Simmons S, Paterson DM, Aspden RJ, Bass SJ, Davies AG, Lichtman ID, and Thorne PD (2016)
The role of biophysical cohesion on subaqueous bed form size. Geophysical Research Letters 43: 1566–1573.
Perillo MM, Best J, and Garcia MH (2014a) A new phase diagram for combined-flow bedforms. Journal of Sedimentary Research 84: 301–313.
Perillo MM, Best JL, Yokokawa M, Sekiguchi T, Takagawa T, and Garcia MH (2014b) A unified model for bedform development and equilibrium under unidirectional, oscillatory and
combined-flows. Sedimentology 61: 2063–2085.
Perillo MM, Prokocki EW, Best JL, and García MH (2014c) Bed form genesis from bed defects under unidirectional, oscillatory, and combined flows. Journal of Geophysical Research -
Earth Surface 119: 2635–2652.
Perron JT, Myrow PM, Huppert KL, Koss AR, and Wickert AD (2018) Ancient record of changing flows from wave ripple defects. Geology 46: 875–878.
Picard MD and High LR (1970) Interference ripple marks formed by ephemeral streams. Journal of Sedimentary Research 40: 708–711.
Ramsay PJ, Cooper JAG, Wright CI, and Mason TR (1989) The occurrence and formation of ladderback ripples in subtidal, shallow-marine sands, Zululand, South Africa. Marine
Geology 86: 229–235.
Reineck H and Singh I (1973) Depositional Sedimentary Environments (With Reference to Terrigenous Clastics). Germany: Spring-Verlag.
Rubin DM and McCulloch DS (1980) Single and superimposed bedforms: A synthesis of San Francisco Bay and flume observations. Sedimentary Geology 26: 207–231.
Saito Y (2005) Beach Stratigraphy. In: Schwartz ML (ed.) Encyclopedia of Coastal Science, pp. 179–181. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.
Schieber J and Southard JB (2009) Bedload transport of mud by floccule ripples—Direct observation of ripple migration processes and their implications. Geology 37: 483–486.
Schieber J, Southard J, and Thaisen K (2007) Accretion of mudstone beds from migrating floccule ripples. Science 318: 1760–1763.
Sherman DJ (2018) Megaripple/flat bed transition in rip current channels. Journal of Coastal Research 85: 246–250.
Sherman DJ and Greenwood B (1989) Hummocky cross-stratification and post-vortex ripples: Length scales and hydraulic analysis. Sedimentology 36: 981–986.
Sherman DJ, Short AD, and Takeda I (1993) Sediment mixing-depth and bedform migration in RIP channels. Journal of Coastal Research 39–48.
Shipp RC (1984) Bedforms and Depositional Sedimentary Structures of a Barred Nearshore System, Eastern Long Island, New York. In: Greenwood B and Davis RA (eds.) Developments
in Sedimentology, pp. 235–259. Elsevier.
Short AD (1991) Macro-meso tidal beach morphodynamics. Journal of Coastal Research 7: 417–436.
Short AD (2020) 16—Wave-dominated, tide-modified and tide-dominated continuum. In: Jackson DWT and Short AD (eds.) Sandy Beach Morphodynamics, pp. 363–389. Elsevier.
Simons DB and Richardson EV (1966) Resistance to flow in alluvial channels. In: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 422-J. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Slootman A and Cartigny MJB (2020) Cyclic steps: Review and aggradation-based classification. Earth-Science Reviews 201: 102949.
Southard JB (1991) Experimental determination of bed-form stability. Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 19: 423–455.
Southard JB and Boguchwal LA (1990) Bed configuration in steady unidirectional water flows; part 2, synthesis of flume data. Journal of Sedimentary Research 60: 658–679.
Southard JB, Lambie JM, Federico DC, Pile HT, and Weidman CR (1990) Experiments on bed configurations in fine sands under bidirectional purely oscillatory flow, and the origin of
hummocky cross-stratification. Journal of Sedimentary Petrology 60: 1–17.
Sundborg Å (1956) The river Klarälven a study of fluvial processes. Geografiska Annaler 38: 125–316.
Swales A, Oldman JW, and Smith K (2006) Bedform geometry on a barred sandy shore. Marine Geology 226: 243–259.
Vaucher R, Pittet B, Humbert T, and Ferry S (2018a) Large-scale bedforms induced by supercritical flows and wave–wave interference in the intertidal zone (Cap Ferret, France).
Geo-Marine Letters 38: 287–305.
Vaucher R, Pittet B, Passot S, Grandjean P, Humbert T, and Allemand P (2018b) Bedforms in a tidally modulated ridge and runnel shoreface (Berck-Plage; North France): Implications
for the geological record. BSGF - Earth Sciences Bulletin 189: 5.
Venditti JG, Church M, and Bennett SJ (2005a) Morphodynamics of small-scale superimposed sand waves over migrating dune bed forms. Water Resources Research 41: , W10423.
Venditti JG, Church M, and Bennett SJ (2005b) On the transition between 2D and 3D dunes. Sedimentology 52: 1343–1359.
 Nearshore Bedforms 17

Venditti JG, Lin CYM, and Kazemi M (2016) Variability in bedform morphology and kinematics with transport stage. Sedimentology 63: 1017–1040.
Wu X and Parsons DR (2019) Field investigation of bedform morphodynamics under combined flow. Geomorphology 339: 19–30.
Yagishita K (1995) Antidunes in a small gorge on the beach sand, the Sanriku Coast, Northeast Japan. Journal of the Sedimentological Society of Japan 42: 21–28.
Yang BC, Dalrymple RW, and Chun SS (2006) The significance of hummocky cross-stratification (HCS) wavelengths: Evidence from an open-coast tidal flat, South Korea. Journal of
Sedimentary Research 76: 2–8.
Yu JIE and Mei CC (2000) Do longshore bars shelter the shore? Journal of Fluid Mechanics 404: 251–268.