Selecting Between One-Dimensional and Two-Dimensional Hydrodynamic Models for Ecohydraulic Analysis

摘要: Aquatic habitat assessment and river restoration design require geospatially explicit maps of hydraulic conditions. Diverse mechanistic ecohydraulic models compute spatially depth velocity results to evaluate suitability as a function these abiotic This study compared from two-dimensional (2D) one-dimensional (1D) with algorithms that laterally discretize 1D interpolate based on the Laplacian heat mapping approach. These ‘conveyance distributed’ methods constitute ‘best modelling practice’ were 2D for first time. The applied three morphologically distinct reaches (leveed, meandering, anastomosing) flows (base, bankfull, flood flows) partially regulated, gravel/cobble lower Yuba River in north–central California. test metrics coefficient determination (R2) median absolute residual ( e˜). quantified incremental uncertainty approximation incurs, which make cost–benefit processes model selection possible. Finally, analysed identify regions where residuals high, indicating divergence assumptions. Paired data (1D–2D) fell between 0.94 ≥ R2 ≥ 1.00 (R2mean = 0.98 R2median = 0.99) all 3.8 ≤  e˜ ≤ 7.2% (i.e. 50% are approximately within ±1.7 3.6%). Higher gradient had higher R2. Velocity diverged more, particularly base flow anastomosing (0.42  e˜ > 22.4% ~ ± 4.6 ±11.2%), e˜mean = 14.2% e˜median = 13% (~ ±7.1 6.5%). conveyance distributed performed best, orthogonal assumptions obtained side channels did not transition backwater conveying area flows. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.