Citation:

Busch, M., K. Costigan, K. Fritz, T. Datry, C. Krabbenhoft, J. Hammond, M. Zimmer, J. Olden, R. Burrows, W. Dodds, K. Boersma, M. Shanafield, S. Kampf, M. Mims, M. Bogan, A. Ward, M. Perez Rocha, S. Godsey, G. Allen, J. Blaszczak, C. Jones, AND D. Allen. What’s in a Name? Patterns, Trends, and Suggestions for Defining Non-Perennial Rivers and Streams. WATER. MDPI, Basel, Switzerland, 12(7):1980, (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/w12071980

Impact/Purpose:

A variety of terms have been used in the scientific literature to describe streams and rivers that cease to flow at some point in time or space. We collectively refer to these as "non-perennial." Some of these terms are used by various water resource management agencies to implement water quality standards, riparian buffer ordinances, and jurisdictional rules. Multiple terminology and unshared definitions can be a source of confusion and misunderstanding of scientific concepts that prevents clear and effective communication. The purpose of this paper is to explore literatrue to access if descriptor use for non-perennial watercourses is consistent across disciplines by assessing topical differences between descriptors, assess how descriptors changed over time, and identify how descriptors have been defined throughout the literature. Through this exploration we provide recommendations regarding universal terms and definitions that be used as common descriptors across disciplines.

Description:

Rivers that cease to flow are globally prevalent. Although many epithets have been used for these rivers, a consensus on terminology has not yet been reached. Doing so would facilitate a marked increase in interdisciplinary interest as well as critical need for clear regulations. Here we reviewed literature from Web of Science database searches of 12 epithets to learn (Objective 1—O1) if epithet topics are consistent across Web of Science categories using latent Dirichlet allocation topic modeling. We also analyzed publication rates and topics over time to (O2) assess changes in epithet use. We compiled literature definitions to (O3) identify how epithets have been delineated and, lastly, suggest universal terms and definitions. We found a lack of consensus in epithet use between and among various fields. We also found that epithet usage has changed over time, as research focus has shifted from description to modeling. We conclude that multiple epithets are redundant. We offer specific definitions for three epithets (non-perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral) to guide consensus on epithet use. Limiting the number of epithets used in non-perennial river research can facilitate more effective communication among research fields and provide clear guidelines for writing regulatory documents.

URLs/Downloads:

Record Details: