A 2006 modeling study of gravel-bed rivers asked why bed-material grain size distributions look the way they do, and concluded that, for the simple case of spatially uniform supply of poorly sorted hillslope sediments, river bed material may essentially mirror the coarse fraction of the sediment supplied by hillslopes, because local resupply offsets the small size reductions caused by abrasion during transport. That conclusion suggested the paper's two stated research priorities for predicting grain size in channel networks: (1) the overarching question of what controls the grain size distribution (GSD) of sediment delivered from hillslopes to channels — the roles of, and feedbacks between, bedrock lithology and fracturing, climate and weathering, erosion rate, and hillslope sediment production and transport processes — and (2), more narrowly important, an improved basis for quantifying how that supply is transformed during fluvial transport: the classical Sternberg abrasion coefficient acts as a black-box parameter that ignores particle splitting and lacks a validated bridge from laboratory size-reduction experiments to field contexts, and no technique reliably separates abrasion-induced fining from selective sorting in natural rivers. Twenty years of subsequent field studies, flume experiments, and coupled landscape-evolution modeling have materially constrained both questions without closing either: no validated general predictive framework exists for hillslope-supplied GSD or for size reduction including fragmentation, and the problem remains a stated research frontier in contemporary reviews.

Background

Gravel-bed rivers carry their coarse sediment as bed load (particles rolling, sliding, or saltating (hopping in short bounces) along the bed), while grains finer than about 2 mm can be carried in suspension. The grain size distribution (GSD) — the abundance of particles of each size — of the bed material controls river morphodynamics, including the rate at which rivers incise into bedrock (coarse particles act both as abrasive tools and as protective cover), and hence the slope and relief of eroding landscapes. Downstream fining, the systematic decrease of bed-material grain size along a river, has two classical candidate causes: size reduction of individual particles by abrasion (collision-driven wearing, described since the 19th century by Sternberg's law, an exponential decay of grain diameter with travel distance governed by an abrasion coefficient), and selective transport and deposition, in which the flow preferentially carries fine grains farther. Sklar, Dietrich, Foufoula-Georgiou, Lashermes, and Bellugi (2006) asked whether the branching structure of a drainage network — which creates a distribution of travel distances from hillslopes to any given river reach — imprints itself on bed-material GSD. Combining mass conservation with the Sternberg decay law, assuming spatially uniform supply of poorly sorted hillslope sediment, no long-term net deposition, and removal of grains below 2 mm into suspension, they found that abrasion has a surprisingly small effect: at any point in the network, local resupply of fresh hillslope sediment offsets the size reduction of material transported from upstream, so the bed load GSD may essentially mirror the coarse component of the hillslope supply GSD. This result inverted the problem: predicting river grain size depends primarily on knowing the GSD that hillslopes deliver, which at the time was almost unmeasured, and secondarily on size-reduction laws better than the black-box Sternberg coefficient — in particular laws that include particle fragmentation (splitting and breaking of grains, as opposed to gradual attrition of their surfaces) and that can translate laboratory measurements from rotating drums or tumbling mills to real rivers, plus field techniques able to distinguish abrasion from selective sorting as causes of observed fining. The paper's discussion also flagged secondary gaps — abrupt treatment of the bed-load/suspended-load transition, size-independence of the abrasion coefficient, neglect of sediment from channel incision into bedrock, and an unvalidated back-of-envelope timescale for bed material to adjust to supply changes — but its two headline priorities were the hillslope-supply GSD question and the size-reduction model question.

Problem Statement

Establish a process-based predictive understanding of the grain size distribution (GSD) of sediment in gravel-bed channel networks, comprising two linked components that jointly determine bed-material GSD. (a) Supply: determine and predict what controls the GSD of sediment delivered from hillslopes to the channel network — specifically the roles and relative importance of bedrock lithology and fracture spacing, climate and chemical/physical/biological weathering, erosion rate and hillslope residence time, and hillslope sediment production and transport processes (e.g., landsliding, creep) — so that the supplied GSD can be predicted as a boundary condition for river morphodynamics from measurable catchment properties. (b) Transformation: determine how that supply GSD is transformed by particle size reduction during fluvial transport, replacing the black-box Sternberg abrasion coefficient with laws that include particle splitting and fragmentation as well as attrition, that depend on transport conditions and grain size as appropriate, and that provide a validated translation from experimental size-reduction measurements (e.g., tumbling mills, flumes) to field contexts; and develop field-deployable techniques that distinguish abrasion- and fragmentation-induced fining from selective sorting and other sources of spatial variability in bed-material grain size. The two components are linked through the model's mass-conservation framework, in which bed-material GSD results from hillslope supply transformed by abrasion during network transport; following the source, the supply question (a) is overarching and the size-reduction question (b) is more narrowly important. Resolving the task requires addressing both linked components, because they jointly determine bed-material GSD: component (a), a validated predictive framework for the hillslope-supplied GSD, and component (b), a validated size-reduction description that includes splitting and fragmentation together with a field-deployable technique that distinguishes abrasion- and fragmentation-induced fining from selective sorting; within component (b) both the size-reduction law and the field technique are required, and a result resolving only one component is a partial resolution that leaves the other open. The source's ranking of (a) as overarching and (b) as more narrowly important reflects their relative scope and does not make either component optional.

References

  1. Sklar, L.S., Dietrich, W.E., Foufoula-Georgiou, E., Lashermes, B., Bellugi, D. (2006). 'Do gravel bed river size distributions record channel network structure?' Water Resources Research 42. DOI: 10.1029/2006WR005035. https://doi.org/10.1029/2006WR005035
  2. Attal, M., Lavé, J. (2009). 'Pebble abrasion during fluvial transport: Experimental results and implications for the evolution of the sediment load along rivers.' Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface 114. DOI: 10.1029/2009JF001328. https://doi.org/10.1029/2009JF001328
  3. Miller, K.L., Szabó, T., Jerolmack, D.J., Domokos, G. (2014). 'Quantifying the significance of abrasion and selective transport for downstream fluvial grain size evolution.' Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface 119, 2412–2429. DOI: 10.1002/2014JF003156. https://doi.org/10.1002/2014JF003156
  4. Roda-Boluda, D.C., D'Arcy, M., McDonald, J., Whittaker, A.C. (2018). 'Lithological controls on hillslope sediment supply: insights from landslide activity and grain size distributions.' Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 43, 956–977. DOI: 10.1002/esp.4281. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.4281
  5. DiBiase, R.A., Rossi, M.W., Neely, A.B. (2018). 'Fracture density and grain size controls on the relief structure of bedrock landscapes.' Geology 46, 399–402. DOI: 10.1130/G40006.1. https://doi.org/10.1130/G40006.1
  6. Neely, A.B., DiBiase, R.A. (2020). 'Drainage Area, Bedrock Fracture Spacing, and Weathering Controls on Landscape-Scale Patterns in Surface Sediment Grain Size.' Journal of Geophysical Research: Earth Surface 125, e2020JF005560. DOI: 10.1029/2020JF005560. https://doi.org/10.1029/2020JF005560
  7. Sklar, L.S., Riebe, C.S., Genetti, J., Leclere, S., Lukens, C.E. (2020). 'Downvalley fining of hillslope sediment in an alpine catchment: implications for downstream fining of sediment flux in mountain rivers.' Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 45, 1828–1845. DOI: 10.1002/esp.4849. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.4849
  8. Terweh, S., Hassan, M.A., Mao, L., Schrott, L., Hoffmann, T.O. (2021). 'Bio-climate affects hillslope and fluvial sediment grain size along the Chilean Coastal Cordillera.' Geomorphology 384, 107700. DOI: 10.1016/j.geomorph.2021.107700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geomorph.2021.107700
  9. Sklar, L.S. (2024). 'Grain Size in Landscapes.' Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences 52, 663–692. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-earth-052623-075856. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-earth-052623-075856
  10. Li, T., Sklar, L.S., Gasparini, N.M. (2025). 'Hillslope grain size variation across evolving landscapes linked to climate, tectonics and lithology.' Earth Surface Processes and Landforms 50, e70111. DOI: 10.1002/esp.70111. https://doi.org/10.1002/esp.70111
  11. Sklar, L., Riebe, C. (2026). 'Transformation of sediment grain size distributions by abrasion and fragmentation in an alpine catchment: linking hillslope weathering and erosion to bedload transport and channel incision.' EGU General Assembly 2026 abstract. DOI: 10.5194/egusphere-egu26-14060. https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-egu26-14060