Laserfiche WebLink
<br />72 <br /> <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />'i <br />~ <br /> <br /> <br />, <br /> <br />; <br />. <br />! <br /> <br />v <br />i <br />. <br />. <br />~ <br /> <br /> <br />" <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />, "'i--, , <br /> <br />1,..'n'nOTn~- <br />'1 ' <br />: ,~ <br />...",' ,HiI' ....'K.....AIU <br />._...,..-t__......._,__j___,._j- L 1 I I . <br /> <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />! <br />i <br />. <br />v <br /> <br />. <br />. <br />. <br />! <br />:; . <br />~ : <br />'t <br />f ~ <br />~ <br />: <br />2 <br /> <br /> <br />1 14' . , . <br />,nUM 01011 <br /> <br />, <br />10 n II <br /> <br />Ffaure t. Ala ett!..td proJect1oD of the IIOst probable tbeoretical dht.d- <br />butloD of or.'Die iDput. fr~ witbio .tre.. lutotropbic proce..e. IDd terreat- <br />rill .ouree. ,10Rl . twelth-order cODtiDUU.. <br /> <br />Source: Jl. L. Vannote. Stroud Water Ile..arch Centu', AClde.y of "at ural Seillnc.. <br />of Philadelphia. UDpubll.hed Manu.cript. <br /> <br />of transport may result in reaches with low gradient and/or reduced flow <br />velocities that favor deposition and entrapment within areas of <br />sedimentation. <br /> <br />A comparison of streams in Idaho, Michigan, Oregon and Pennsylvania <br />indicated a general rate of change in the retention character from <br />headwater streams to larger downstream areas (Minshall. et al. 1983). <br />Headwater streams with rough channel substrate had a higher retention <br />capacity than larger streams with a reduced number of effective hydraulic <br />controls and highly erosive flow. However, the retention of benthic <br />organic matter in streams involves more than the force of flowing water and <br />most likely depends on a combination of factors related to watershed area, <br />disCharge, width, type of riparian vegetation input, functional group <br />processing and channel roughness. <br /> <br />.r~tii~1Qt <br /> <br />- <br />