See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282850993

Sediment Transport Regime and

Geomorphological Change in a High Discharge
Tropical Delta (Magdalena River, Colombia...

Article in Journal of Coastal Research October 2015

DOI: 10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-14-00263.1

CITATIONS READS

2 206

8 authors, including:

Juan Camilo Restrepo Camille Traini

Universidad del Norte (Colombia) University of Bayreuth
23 PUBLICATIONS 203 CITATIONS 11 PUBLICATIONS 34 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Juan Carlos Ortz Andrs Fernando Orejarena Rondn

Universidad del Norte (Colombia) Universidad del Norte (Colombia)
23 PUBLICATIONS 111 CITATIONS 3 PUBLICATIONS 3 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Juan Camilo Restrepo on 14 October 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. All in-text references underlined in blue are added to the original document
and are linked to publications on ResearchGate, letting you access and read them immediately.
 Journal of Coastal Research 00 0 000000 Coconut Creek, Florida Month 0000

Sediment Transport and Geomorphological Change in a

High-Discharge Tropical Delta (Magdalena River,
Colombia): Insights from a Period of Intense Change and
Human Intervention (19902010)
Juan Camilo Restrepo*, Kerstin Schrottke, Camille Traini, Juan Carlos Ortz,
Andres Orejarena, Lus Otero, Aldemar Higgins, and Leonardo Marriaga

Grupo de Fsica Aplicada: Oceano y Department of Geosciences Centro de Investigaciones Oceanograficas
Atmosfera JRG Sea-Level Rise and Coastal Erosion e Hidrograficas
Departamento de Fsica Kiel University Direccion General Martima
Universidad del Norte Kiel, Germany Cartagena, Colombia
Barranquilla, Colombia

ABSTRACT
Restrepo, J.C.; Schrottke, K.; Traini, C.; Ortiz, J.C.; Orejarena, A.; Otero, L.; Higgins, A., and Marriaga, L., 0000.
Sediment transport and geomorphological change in a high-discharge tropical delta (Magdalena River, Colombia):
Insights from a period of intense change and human intervention (19902010). Journal of Coastal Research, 00(0), 000
000. Coconut Creek (Florida), ISSN 0749-0208.

There is strong indication that environmental changes and human interventions have affected freshwater discharge and
sediment flux in the Magdalena River (northwestern South America) within the period from 1990 to 2010. Thus, stream
flow, suspended sediment load (SSL), and riverbed dynamics were analysed in this study for estimating changes in the
suspended sediment transport regime as well as of erosional/depositional patterns in different zones of the delta. It can
be shown that stream flow increased at a higher rate than suspended sediment transport, promoting changes in the
sediment transport regime. Erosion appeared at the mouth/frontal bar and the outlet zones and modified the
sedimentary balance within the prodelta in the early 2000s. There is indication that cycles of erosion and accretion were
controlled by the magnitude of fluvial discharge and riverbed scouring in the river outlet, whereas effluent diffusion and
sediment dispersion were dominant in the delta front. High freshwater discharge, as buoyancy inputs, promoted the
transfer of sediments from the river channel to the outer prodelta through the upper layers of the water column. Total
sediment accumulation in the delta corresponded to ,5% of the annual mean SSL of the Magdalena River. Overall, delta
morphology remained relatively stable, experiencing a slow progradational state with highest sedimentation rates
(1430 mm y1) in the deepest zones.

ADDITIONAL INDEX WORDS: Sediment dynamic, deltaic processes, morphological changes, delta evolution, erosion,
sedimentation.

INTRODUCTION
Boundary conditions and forcing factors such as sediment
supply, freshwater discharges, coastal energy, accommodation
space, and differences in density between fluvial, estuarine,
and marine waters control the dynamics and architecture of
deltaic zones (Li et al., 1998a, 1998b; Orton and Reading, 1993;
Saito, Yang, and Hori, 2001; Syvitski and Saito, 2007; van der
Wal, Pye, and Neal, 2002; Wang, Hassan, and Xiaoping, 2006;
Wright and Coleman, 1973). Changes in any of these factors
will influence the geomorphological, hydrodynamic, and sedi-
mentological balance of these systems (Fan and Huang, 2005;
Gao, Wang, and Gao, 2011; Wang et al., 2010; Wang, Hassan,
and Xiaoping, 2006; Yang et al., 2003). Knowing that these
highly complex coastal sites are nowadays strongly affected by
anthropogenic interventions, demand on exploring how deltaic
systems evolve and respond to changes of forcing conditions is
significantly increasing (e.g., Gao, Wang, and Gao, 2011;
DOI: 10.2112/JCOASTRES-D-14-00263.1 received 28 December 2014;
accepted in revision 13 August 2015; corrected proofs received
24 September 2015; published pre-print online 13 October 2015.
*Corresponding author: restrepocj@uninorte.edu.co
Syvitski and Saito, 2007; van der Wal, Pye, and Neal, 2002;
Wang et al., 2010). Hydrological shifts by changes of the
rainfall patterns, water withdrawal, e.g., by building of water
reservoirs, or deforestation within the catchment area can
already be associated with significant changes in freshwater
discharge and related sediment transport, in turn leading to
disruption of sedimentary processes at deltas (e.g., Gao, Wang,
and Gao, 2011; Traini et al., 2012; Wang et al., 2010; Wang,
Hassan, and Xiaoping, 2006; Xu, 2002; Yang et al., 2003; Zhang
et al., 2008;). For example, a significant reduction in precipi-
tation rates and a series of human activities, mainly involving
the construction of large reservoirs and soil conservation
practices within the Yellow River basin (Huanghe, China),
has led to a substantial decrease (~90%) in water and sediment
discharge to the Bohai Sea during the last 50 years (Fan and
Huang, 2005; Wang et al., 2007, 2010; Wang, Hassan, and
Xiaoping, 2006). In response to these changes, the Yellow River
delta has undergone a series of morphological adjustments,
comprising the narrowing and abandoning of active tributar-
ies, the formation of new river mouths, and significant changes
in the coastline (Wang et al., 2007; Xu, 2002). There are other

Coastal Education and Research Foundation, Inc. 2015 examples of responses of deltas to changes in river inputs
0 Restrepo et al.
associated with human impacts or climate-induced changes.
They include variations in sediment dispersal patterns, shifts
in turbidity maximum zones, changes in the sediment
retention index in subaqueous deltas, formation/migration of
shoals and bars, and modifications of subsidence/sinking
processes (e.g., Gao, Wang, and Gao, 2011; Li et al., 1998a;
Maillet et al., 2006; Syvitski and Saito, 2007; van der Wal, Pye,
and Neal, 2002; Wang et al., 2010; Xu, 2002; Yang et al., 2003).
The Aswan Dam (Egypt), for example, traps more than 90% of
the sediment load that was formerly delivered to the Mediter-
ranean Sea by the Nile River, causing erosion rates of .10 m
y1 at two active tributaries (Stanley and Warney, 1998).
However, the response mechanisms of sedimentary processes
in deltas to significant changes in the corresponding catchment
areas are not fully understood (e.g., Gao, Wang, and Gao, 2011;
Syvitski and Saito, 2007; Wang et al., 2010). This is especially
the case in rivers characterised by severe anthropogenic
interventions and environmental changes (Syvitski and Saito,
2007).
The Magdalena River, in northwestern South America
(Figure 1), provides an illustrative example of strong interac-
tion between processes acting in the river basin and delta, also
in the context of environmental change and recent human
intervention. With a drainage basin of 2.57 3 105 km2, the
Magdalena River delivers 26% of the total freshwater dis-
charge (205 km3 y1) and 38% of the total sediment load (144 3
106 t y1) to the Caribbean Sea (Higgins et al., 2015; Restrepo et
al., 2014). Thus, it delivers the highest amount of freshwater
and sediment to the Caribbean Sea. At the same time, it
belongs to the worlds rivers with highest sediment and
freshwater discharge to the ocean (e.g., Milliman and Meade,
1983; Restrepo and Kjerfve, 2000). There is currently ample
evidence of changes taking place in the Magdalena River basin.
Restrepo et al. (2014) detected a shift in the hydrological
patterns of the Magdalena River in 19982002. This shift was
characterised by a higher hydrologic variability, a steady
increase in the mean stream flow, and the strengthening of a
quasi-decadal oscillatory signal. The Magdalena River basin
also experienced dramatic land surface disturbances, such as
forest clearing, arable land expansion, and mining exploitation,
whereby sediment delivery from the main tributaries signifi-
cantly deviates from long-term natural rates (Restrepo and
Syvitski, 2006). Thus, it is unclear how sediment transport
processes and the subaqueous delta architecture respond to
changes in fluvial inputs.
In this study, we hypothesize that the combined effect of
changes in anthropogenic interventions and the shift of the
hydrological pattern at the Magdalena River basin alter
freshwater discharge and sediment transport, promoting
morphological changes at the river mouth and subaqueous
delta. The aim of this work is (1) to quantify suspended
sediment transport rates and detect changes in the sediment
transport regime occurring within the last 2 decades; (2) to
analyse the recent morphological evolution and dominant
processes of sediment transport; and (3) to evaluate the relative
importance of the variability of freshwater discharge to
dominant sediment transport processes and to the short- to
midterm morphological evolution of the Magdalena River
delta.
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 00, No. 0, 0000
Physical Setting of the Magdalena River Delta
The Magdalena River forms a 1690-km2 arcuate delta. The
delta presents a main discharge channel (Bocas de Ceniza), a
major distributary discharging into Cartagena Bay (Canal del
Dique), and a complex network of minor connections with the
Cienaga Grande de Santa Marta (Figure 1). Bocas de Ceniza is
aligned to a high-slope (~408) submarine canyon, the Magda-
lena Canyon. The morphology and architecture of this canyon
is related to sedimentary input of the Magdalena River (Ercilla
et al., 2002; Vernette et al., 1992). The sediments deposited in
the canyon feed a turbidite system through processes of
landslides and turbidity currents, triggered by seismic events
(Ercilla et al., 2002; Kolla and Buffer, 1985; Koopmans, 1971;
Molinares et al., 2012). This seismic activity has occasionally
shown an active role in the river mouth geometry, particularly
in 1935 and 1963 when it promoted the deepening of the main
channel (Heezen, 1956; Koopmans, 1971).
The main discharge channel has undergone major physical
changes after a variety of engineering activities during the last
century (Figure 2). Before 1924, it was characterised by cuspate
or lobate forms. The number and position of landforms changed
continuously, forming different connections between the river
channel and the systems of coastal lagoons (Figure 2a). To
prevent siltation at the river mouth and to promote commercial
navigation to the Port of Barranquilla, a series of engineering
structures were planned along the main channel. Thus, from
1936 onward, the delta has been dominated by a single
discharge channel, which is isolated from the coastal lagoon
systems (Cienaga de Mallorqun) and forced into a straight line
by two jetties (Figure 2b). In 1949 and 1951 the jetties were
reinforced and extended to 120 m and 53 m, respectively
(Figure 2c). Between 1994 and 1995, a training wall (1.2 km in
length) and four additional contraction groynes (0.070.29 km
in length) were built on the eastern margin to close a secondary
channel, increase current flow, and concentrate the flow along
the main channel (Figure 1b). Finally, between 2008 and 2009,
two outer contraction groynes of 0.67 km and 0.23 km were
attached to the northern section of the eastern jetty. Currently,
the mouth exhibits a width of 430 m and a minimum depth of
9.15 m in the deep channel, and the western and eastern jetties
extend for 7.4 km and 1.4 km, respectively (Figure 1b)
(Alvarado, 2008; Borda et al., 1973).
The delta exhibits a microtidal regime ranging between 0.64
m and 0.48 m during spring and neap tides, respectively, with
primarily mixed diurnal tides (Restrepo and Lopez, 2008).
During most of the year (DecemberJuly), the delta wave
system is dominated by the presence of swells from the
northeast (96%), which display significant wave heights (Hs)
of 2.2 6 1.1 m and peak periods (Tp) of 6.7 6 2.3 seconds (Ortiz
et al., 2013). The delta experiences high-energy wave condi-
tions between January and March, caused by cold fronts, and
from June to November associated with storm surges and
hurricanes. Maximum Hs values of 4.05.0 m have been
reported in deep waters during extreme wave events (Ortiz,
2012; Ortiz et al., 2013).
The amount and temporal variability of the river discharge
depend on the annual hydrological cycle, controlled by the shift
of the Intertropical Convergence Zone (ITCZ), whereby the
drainage basin experiences two well-defined wet seasons. The
 Magdalena River DeltaRecent Changes 0

Figure 1. (a) Location of the Magdalena River in northwestern South America; (b) detailed view of the river mouth site showing the main engineering structures
(17) and the mooring sites for the field survey.

first season extends from April to June, when the ITCZ
migrates from south to north. The second season lasts from
September to November, when the ITCZ shifts southward. The
periods between DecemberMarch and JulyAugust corre-
spond to the dry and transition seasons, respectively (Poveda,
2004). The seasonal distribution shows high discharges of
freshwater (9237 m3 s1) and suspended sediment (690 3 103 t
d1) in November. Lowest mean values appear in March, with
3685 m3 s1 and 146 3 103 t d1 of freshwater and suspended
sediment load (SSL), respectively (Higgins et al., 2015;
Restrepo et al., 2014). At interannual scales, major anomalies
in hydrological patterns are linked to both phases of the El
NinoSouthern Oscillation (ENSO) (Poveda et al. 2001;
Restrepo et al., 2014). Mean annual discharges during El Nino
and La Nina years are 5512 and 8747 m3 s1, respectively.
Mean daily sediment loads amount to 256 3 103 t d1 during El
Nino years and 511 3 103 t d1 during La Nina years (Restrepo
and Kjerfve, 2000).
Restrepo and Syvitski (2006) indicated that deforestation,
mining, and dam building in the Magdalena River drainage
basin also modified the natural hydrology of the main
tributaries of the Magdalena River in the last decades, leading
to changes in its freshwater and sediment discharge. From
1970 to 1990, ~4.8 3 106 ha of forests were converted into
agricultural and pasture lands with deforestation rates of 2343
103 ha y1 (Restrepo and Syvitski, 2006). Between 1980 and
2000, mining rose steadily up to 2% of the national gross
domestic product (GDP); for instance, open-pit coal exploitation
increased from 4 3 106 t y1 in 1980 to 20 3 106 t y1 in 2000.
Furthermore, within the drainage basin, there are 39 dam

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 00, No. 0, 0000

0 Restrepo et al.
Figure 2. Schematic representation of the Magdalena River delta between 1894 and 1961, according to historical maps and charts from (a) 1894 to 1911, (b) 1924,
(c) 1936, and (d) 1961. Modified and adapted from Borda et al. (1973).
reservoirs with a total water storage capacity of 8.2 3 109 m3
(IDEAM, 2001).
METHODS
Data on stream flow, water properties (current flow, salinity,
and temperature), SSLs, and grain size, as well on bathymetry,
were collected and analysed in this study as follows.
Analyses of Data on Stream Flow and Suspended
Sediment
Stream flow and SSL were both measured monthly (1941,
1972 to 2010) and daily (1990 to 2010) at the hydrologic station
of Calamar (Figure 1) by the Instituto de Hidrologa,
Meteorologa y Estudios Ambientales de Colombia (IDEAM ).
Simultaneous measurements of water level, stream flow, and
suspended sediment concentration (SSC) were done by the
IDEAM during high, intermediate, and low river discharge at
this gauging station. Sediment samples were taken from a fixed
volume of water samples (1 L); the sediment samples were
dried and weighed to estimate concentration using the
gravimetric method and the ratio was determined between
the net weight of sediment and the respective volume of water
sample. Thus, for each measurement of water level there is a
corresponding measurement of stream flow and SSC. Using
data points of water levelstream flow and stream flowSSC, a
rating curve and a sediment rating curve were established,
respectively (IDEAM, 2013). The rating curve and sediment
rating curve at Calamar are power functions, statistically
significant, estimated through well-known techniques (e.g.,
Buchanan and Somers, 1969; Colby, 1956). Therefore, daily
water-level readings for the whole record were converted to
stream flow via the rating curve, and the SSC was estimated
through the sediment rating curve using daily stream flow
data. Then, SSL was estimated through the integration of
simultaneous data on stream flow and SSC. These measure-
ments followed standard procedures (e.g., Asselman, 2000;
Buchanan and Somers, 1969; Colby, 1956); they were carried
out in a deep/stable section of the river, the sampling
instruments were deployed parallel to the flows direction,
and the sediment samplings were isokinetic. The rating curve
and sediment rating curve at this gauging station are revised
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 00, No. 0, 0000
and adjusted on a regular basis (IDEAM, 2013). According to
the measuring techniques and procedures for estimating the
respective rating curves, the inaccuracy of the stream flow and
SSL values is estimated as low (,7%) (IDEAM, 2013). A more
detailed analysis of the sediment rating curves at Calamar
gauging station can be found at Higgins et al. (2015). Calamar
station is located ~91 km away from the mouth of the
watershed. A valuable integrated signal between gain and loss
of the continental water cycle can therefore be gained from
these data (e.g., Labat, 2010; Milliman et al., 2008).
The nonparametric, rank-based MannKendall test (MKT)
was conducted to detect and evaluate the significance of
monotonic trends in time series of annual stream flow and
SSL, over different periods (i.e. 19412010, n 70; 19722010,
n 39; 19721990, n 19; 19902000, n 11; 20002010, n
11). The MKT is considered one of the most robust techniques
available to identify and estimate linear trends in hydrological
data (Milliman et al., 2008; Yue, Pilon, and Cavadivas, 2002;
Zhang et al., 2008). In this test, no trend in the time series is
considered as a null hypothesis. A standardised variable (Z)
was calculated for verification. The null hypothesis was
rejected for a significance level a if Z . Z(1a/2), where Z(1 a/2)
is the standard value of a normal distribution with a probability
of a/2 (Yue, Pilon, and Cavadivas, 2002). A maximum
significance level (a) of 0.1 was set for this study, implying a
minimum statistical confidence level of 90% for Z 1.64. If the
Z-value increases, the statistical significance of the trend is
enhanced. The Sens slope method (i.e. TheilSen line) was also
performed for time series of annual values. When a monotonic
linear trend is detected using MKT, the Sens slope method can
be performed to estimate the slope of the trend. By using this
method, it can be calculated how the median concentration
changes linearly with time, not affected by outliers. This
constitutes an alternative to the parametric ordinary least-
squares regression method (e.g., Yue, Pilon, and Cavadivas,
2002).
Continuous wavelet transform (CWT) analyses (Morlet
wavelet spectrum) were applied to estimate periodicities and
patterns of variability and to distinguish temporal oscillations
in the time series, identifying the intermittency of each
timescale process. Generalised local base functions (i.e., mother
 Magdalena River DeltaRecent Changes
wavelets) were used for the CWT. They were stretched and
translated in terms of frequency and time resolution (Torrence
and Compo, 1998). In addition, the global wavelet spectrum
and the cross-correlation wavelet (XWT) between stream flow
and SSL were also calculated to estimate characteristic scales
of long-term processes and to determine the variance signal
distribution between the different scales. The XWT was
performed on the 19722010 period to highlight the scale-
dependent relationship between these signals, exposing re-
gions with high common power and revealing information
about phase relationship (e.g., Labat, 2010; Torrence and
Compo, 1998). The CWT was applied on monthly deseasonal-
ised time series. Statistical significance of signal processes
were
p limited by the cutoff frequency (T/2) and edge effects (T/
2 2), defining T as the total length of the hydrological record.
Thus, to identify significant fluctuations, the 95% confidence
levels for contours and edge effects were calculated, following
the Torrence and Compo (1998) methodology.
Measurements of Current Flow, Salinity, and Particle
Size
Stationary current measurements were conducted using a
ship-mounted RD Instruments-RDIt 1200-kHz acoustic Dopp-
ler current profiler (ADCP) in the river outlet (Figure 1) during
seasons of high (2830 November 2012) and low (1921 April
2013) freshwater discharge. Because of diurnal security
restrictions in the deep navigation channel, data collection
periods were limited to one-half of the tidal period (~12 h at
nocturnal time). The transducers of the downward-looking
ADCP were installed ~0.6 m below the water surface. The first
bin was centred 0.5 m away from the transducer head. The bin
size was set to 0.5 m. Data were collected at a frequency of 3.3
Hz, averaged in 15.15-second ensembles (50 pings per
ensemble), with ensemble intervals of 300 seconds. The
standard deviation of these settings was 0.01 m s1. Instanta-
neous and semitidally averaged vertical flow profiles were
calculated applying standard techniques, as described in
Kjerfve (1979).
At this site water samples (1 L) from the water surface were
collected every 2 hours with a horizontal Niskin bottle for
particle-size analyses of suspended particulate matter (SPM),
using a multisizer counter (Multisizer Coulter Countert).
Particle sizes in the range from 0.1 to 600 lm can be detected
with this technique by using the laser dispersion principle.
Salinity and temperature measurements were also conducted
in the water column every 2 hours using a conductivity
temperaturedepth SeaBird 19VPlus, with a sampling rate of 4
Hz. Salinity and temperature were also measured over 12
vertical profiles along one longitudinal transect, spanning ~9
km in the deep channel (Figure 1b). Transect profiles were
conducted during four surveys (2930 November 2012; 2021
April 2013) at ebb tide to determine the spatial variability of
the salinity in the lower delta.
Velocity, temperature, and salinity data from stationary
measurements were used to calculate the layered Richardson
number (RL) (Equation 1),
ghqb  qs
RL 1
U 2 qo
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 00, No. 0, 0000
0
Table 1. Location and dates of sounding data used in this study and the
cell sizes of the interpolated bathymetric data (raster format).
Area Cell Size (m) Soundings
Outlet 8.5 (1) June 2000, (2) May 2004,
(3) July 2011
Mouth/Frontal Bar 2.5 (1) August 1994, (2) June 2000,
(3) May 2004, (4) July 2011
Delta Front 10.0 (1) August 1994, (2) June 2000,
(3) April 2008, (4) April 2010,
(5) June 2012
where U is depth-averaged velocity (m s1), qo is depth-
averaged density (kg m3), h is water layer height, (qb qs) is
density difference between superficial layer and bottom layer,
and g acceleration due to gravity. The RL allows an
estimation of the mixing strength within the water column,
considering tidal and discharge changes. When RL . 20, the
water column is stable and bottom turbulence is not effective
in generating mixing; whereas when 2 , RL , 20, mixing is
activated, and in the case of RL , 2, turbulence generated by
bottom friction is the main mechanism of mixing (Dyer, 1998).
Processing and Analysis of Bathymetric Data
Bathymetric data from 1994 to 2012 was provided by the
National Hydrographic Service (Servicio Hidrografico Nacio-
nalCentro de Investigaciones Oceanograficas e Hidrografi-
cas). Data accuracy amounts to 0.1 m in the vertical and 1.0 m
in the horizontal direction. As successive surveys do not cover
the same area, three zones with full coverage were defined
(outlet, mouth/frontal bar, and delta front) to adjust boundaries
and ensure concordance within the surveyed area. Digital
elevation models with cell sizes ranging from 2.5 to 10.0 m
(Table 1) were set up via triangular interpolation (triangular
irregular network [TIN]) using ARC Gis Version 10t. TIN
provides high accuracy relative to the density of source data
(Maillet et al., 2006). Areas of net erosion/accretion as well as
the corresponding volumetric gains/losses in the delta were
determined by superimposing successive soundings from
comparable hydrological seasons (Table 1). Volumetric values
were converted into gravimetric sediment masses by estimat-
ing bulk properties of the sediment. Bottom sediments at the
Magdalena River mouth are predominantly coarse and
medium silts, mainly composed of plagioclase and quartz
(Klingebiel and Vernette, 1979; Kolla and Buffler, 1985).
Considering that the density of unconsolidated sediments with
these kinds of minerals ranges from 2.63 g cm3 to 2.76 g cm3,
we used a dry bulk density of 2.65 g cm3. Sediment porosities
up to 73% have been reported for in situ siltsand aggregates
deposited in bays and estuaries (Leeder, 2011); thus, we
decided to use a mean porosity of 80% to be conservative in
the estimation of gravimetric sediment masses. These esti-
mates represent only the apparent sedimentation, because
processes of consolidation/compaction and changing porosities
within sediment deposits are not considered. This approach
was successfully used in various estuarine systems, including
the use of similar values of the bulk properties (Lane, 2004;
Maillet et al., 2006; Rowan, Goodwill, and Greco, 1995; van der
Wal, Pye, and Neal, 2002).
0 Restrepo et al.

Figure 3. (a) Stream flow and suspended sediment load of the Magdalena River: Annual mean (thin line with circles), long-term trend (thick gray line), and short-
term trend (thick black line) for selected periods; trends are based on MKT and Sens slope methods (see Table 2 for statistics). Daily fluvial discharges for the
period of 19902010: (b) stream flow and (c) suspended sediment load.

RESULTS
This section presents results dealing with the magnitude and
variability of stream flow and SSL; seasonal characteristics of
the flow velocity, saline structure, and particle size; as well as
patterns of erosion and sedimentation in the river mouth and
the delta front.
Magnitude and Variability of Stream Flow and SSL
From 1941 to 2010, mean annual stream flow of the
Magdalena River was 6501 6 1370 m3 s1, which equals 205
km3 y1. During this period, the annual stream flow experi-
enced an increasing trend, significant at a 95% confidence level.
This trend was particularly pronounced within the last 20
years, underlined by Sens slope estimates of 297.7 m3 s1 y1
and 493.7 m3 s1 y1. Between the 1990s and the 2000s, the
Table 2. Stream flow and suspended sediment load: annual mean and results of the MannKendall and Sens slope tests for selected periods.
mean annual stream flow increased to 12.6%, from 6565 m3 s1
to 7391 m3 s1 (Table 2 and Figure 3a). Stream flow peaks
higher than 14,000 m3 s1 appeared in the flooding seasons of
1999, 2000, 2008, and 2010. Highest stream flow occurred in
1999, when daily discharge exceeded 8000 m3 s1 during the
entire year. On the contrary, in 1997, daily stream flow was
below 5000 m3 s1 (Figure 3b). Prominent changes in stream
flow appeared from 1990 to 2010 when separating between
flood and dry seasons. In 1996, 2000, 2007, 2008, and 2010 the
flooding season extended from June to December, leading to
stream flow above 9000 m3 s1 over 7 months, whereas during
1992 and 2001, the dry season was longer, extending from
January to September. Stream flow differences between the
flood and dry seasons increased in the 2000s (Figure 3b).

Stream Flow Suspended Sediment Load

MannKendall Test MannKendall Test
Annual Mean Sens Slope Annual Mean Sens Slope
Period (3103 m3 s1) Test Z p-Value (m3 s1 y1) (3106 t y1) Test Z p-Value (3106 t y1)
1941/19722010* 6.5 6 1.4 2.02 ,0.05 17.26 142.0 6 48 0.99 ns 0.84
19721990 6.5 6 0.9 0.42 ns 17.26 141.2 6 48 1.89 ,0.10 3.80
19902000 6.5 6 1.7 1.40 ns 297.72 151.4 6 46 0.62 ns 1.10
2000-2010 7.4 6 1.7 2.18 ,0.05 493.69 137.9 6 54 2.02 ,0.05 14.29

* Stream flow from 1941 to 2010 (n 70); suspended sediment load from 1972 to 2010 (n 39), 19721990 (n 19), 19902000, and 20002010 (n 11).

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 00, No. 0, 0000

 Magdalena River DeltaRecent Changes
Figure 4. Magdalena River continuous wavelet transform (CWT) spectrum
for (a) stream flow and (b) SSL. Global wavelet spectrum for (c) stream flow
and (d) SSL. (e) Cross-wavelet transform (XWT) of the stream flow and SSL.
The red colours in the wavelet spectra correspond to high values of the
transform coefficients (power). The thick black contour delimits the 95%
confidence level against AR(1) red noise, and the cone of influence where
edge effects are not negligible is shown as a shaded contour. The arrows
reflect the relative phase relationship (in phase pointing right, antiphase
pointing left, stream flow leading SSL by 908 pointing straight down).
The continuous wavelet spectrum of the Magdalenas stream
flow highlighted a 6-month component that was visible from
approximately 1974 to 1995 and 2000 to 2010. The annual
signal appeared as a quasi-nonintermittent process of highest
magnitudes from 1972 to 1990, 1994 to 2001, and 2007 to 2010
(Figure 4a). At interannual scale, stream flow exhibited a 34-
year process between 1979 and 1984 and a 47-year oscillation
between the intervals 19721981 and 19892003. The 47-year
signal exhibited a maximum power between 1994 and 2002. A
quasi-decadal oscillation (812 y) appeared in 1990 and
extended to 2010; this signal was particularly strong between
1998 and 2010. The wavelet spectrum also reflected a period of
intense activity from 1998 to 2002, characterised by superim-
posed oscillations of 0.51, 34, 47, and 912 years. A strong
quasi-biennial stream flow oscillation arose in 2009 (Figure 4a).
This fluctuation superimposed with an 812-year process and
coincided with a period of severe floods (Figure 3). The annual
band appeared as the main oscillatory component, whereas the
47-year band emerged as a second-order source of variability
(Figure 4c).
SSL in the Magdalena River amounted to 5.5 3 109 t between
1972 and 2010, with 142.0 6 48.6 3 106 t y1, on average.
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 00, No. 0, 0000
0
During this period, the annual mean showed a slight, but
statistically not significant, increasing trend (Table 2 and
Figure 3a). Average annual SSL decreased from the 1990s
(154.4 3 106 t y1) to the 2000s (137.9 3 106 t y1) by 8.9%. Only
around 2006, SSL exceeded values of 150 3 106 t y1, when a
new significant upward trend (95% confidence level) appeared
during the 20002010 period (Table 2 and Figure 3a). Highest
SSL with peaks .900 3 103 t d1 occurred during flood seasons
(SeptemberNovember). Seasons lasting from June to Decem-
ber with SSLs .500 3 103 t d1 were identified in 1996, 1998,
1999, 2000, 2007, 2008, and 2010. In contrast, lower SSLs were
experienced in 1997 and 2005, with values ,100 3 103 t d1
being observed during most of the year (Figure 3c).
The continuous wavelet spectrum of the Magdalenas SSL
highlighted a 6-month process, showing maximum power at
different periods (Figure 4b). The annual signal exhibited its
maximum power from 1974 to 1976, 1986 to 1992, 1994 to 2000,
and 2007 to 2010 (Figure 4b). At interannual scale, SSL
indicated a quasi-biannual process between 19872000 and
20092010. In addition, a 45-year oscillation from 1997 to
2002 and a 57-year signal from 1983 to 2000, showing a peak
power from 1985 to 1996, was detected. A quasi-decadal
oscillation (812 year) appeared in 1985 and extended to
2010. The wavelet spectrum also highlighted periods of intense
activity around 19881990 and 19951998, characterised by
superimposed oscillations of 0.51, 23, 57, and 812 years, as
well as between 2009 and 2010, with superimposed oscillations
of 1, 23, and 812 years (Figure 4b). These periods coincided
with high SSL (Figure 3). The annual band of SSL appeared to
be the main oscillatory component, whereas the 57-year band
emerged as a second-order source of hydrological variability
(Figure 4d).
Oscillations greater than 1 year were not statistically
significant for both stream flow and SSL; interpretation must
therefore be made carefully (Figures 4c and d). Nevertheless,
such information was considered useful because (1) CWT
isolates signals hidden in noise, (2) oscillations are within the
range defined by cutoff frequency and edge effects, and (3) zero
padding technique might reduce the true power of lower
frequencies. More data are needed to test the true statistical
significance of these oscillations. The XWT revealed a signif-
icant common power in the ~0.5-year band from 1974 to 1983,
1985 to 1992, 1993 to 1995, 1999 to 2005, and 2006 to 2010.
Highest scale dependence was observed in the annual band,
except between 2001 and 2007, where both time series
exhibited low power. The latter indicates low scales of
variability during this period. The XWT showed that stream
flow and SSL were in phase in all the sectors with significant
common power. Outside the areas with significant power, the
phase relationship was also predominantly in phase, indicating
phase locked (Figure 4e).
Seasonal Characteristics of Flow Velocity, Salinity, and
Particle Size
In general, current velocities were ~54% higher within the
season of high discharge, corresponding to depth-averaged
values of 1.06 and 0.77 m s1 in November. The measurements
revealed a layered flow during the high-discharge season
(Figure 5). However, this layered feature weakened as a
0 Restrepo et al.

Figure 5. Current velocity contours throughout a half-tidal cycle (left) and the corresponding vertical profile of the residual currents (right) measured during (a)
28/29 November (h 8.0 m), and (b) 29/30 November (h 7.5 m). The values represent the velocity in m s1; z depth measured vertically downward from the
ADCP; h total depth measured downward from the ADCP.

consequence of decreased stream flow during the low-discharge
season. Furthermore, superficial current velocities were
stronger than the ones observed near the bed (Figures 5 and
6). Peak velocities near the water surface ranged from 0.9 to 1.2
m s1 in November and 0.48 to 0.58 m s1 in April, whereas the
near-bed peak values varied from 0.6 to 0.9 m s1 in November
and 0.36 to 0.42 m s1 in April. Consequently, shear velocities
(u*) were higher (0.0420.052 m s1) during high-discharge
season compared with the values that appeared in the low-
discharge season (0.0140.024 m s1). Overall, flow was
seaward directed (Figures 5 and 6). At this site, the estimated
layered Richardson number ranged between 0.3 3 103 and 6.8
3 102, implying that turbulence, generated by bottom friction,
is the main mechanism for in situ mixing.
Spatial distribution of salinity always exhibited sharp spatial
gradients with well-defined haloclines, appearing in the upper
(delta front) and lower (river mouth) water column, implying
the existence of a salt wedge (Figure 7). At the delta front,
salinity amounted to 620 in the upper and 3335 in the lower
water column, respectively. At the river mouth, values were
lower, with 06 in the upper and 2633 in the lower water
column. Within the riverine section, salinity was zero, except
for the deeper zones between 2 and 5 km, where salinity ,3 was
observed (Figures 7a and b). During the low-discharge season,
the salt wedge penetrated ~4 km landward, leading to higher
near-bed salinity and implying strong seasonal-dependent
stratification. The halocline was gently tilted, but steepened
during the high-discharge season (Figure 7).
The dominant particle sizes of SPM (76.4% of total weight)
observed in the uppermost water column in November was
coarse silt (d10 0.3 lm; d50 14.1 lm; d90 45.9 lm). Again,
medium silt (d10 0.3 lm; d50 7.8 lm; d90 23.8 lm)
predominantly occurred in April with the 65.4% of total weight
(Figure 8). Sand-sized particles accounted for 7.1% during the
high-discharge season but were almost absent during the low-
discharge season (1.9%). Clay-sized particles increased from
16.5% to 32.7% between the seasons. Overall, the samples were
very poorly sorted (Figure 8).
Patterns of Erosion and Sedimentation at the River
Mouth
From 1994 to 2000, large sedimentation zones appeared in
the mouth/frontal bar sector of the Magdalena River, extending
over 0.24 km2 (82% of the total subarea evaluated) and
containing 0.61 3 106 m3 of accumulated sediments (Table 3
and Figure 9b). Accumulation was especially apparent in the
southern part of the mouth with rates of 0.38 m y1, leading to
2.3 m in total (Figure 9b). This period of intense sedimentation

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 00, No. 0, 0000

 Magdalena River DeltaRecent Changes 0

Figure 6. Current velocity contours throughout a half-tidal cycle (left) and the corresponding vertical profile of residual currents (right) measured during (a) 19/
20 April (h 6.0 m) and (b) 20/21 April (h 5.6 m). The values represent the velocity in m s1; z depth measured vertically downward from the ADCP; h total
depth measured downward from the ADCP.

was followed by an interval of erosion from 2000 to 2004, not
only in the mouth/frontal bar, but also in the main outlet
(Figure 9). During this period, erosional areas covered 0.19 km2
and 1.61 km2 (65% and 69% of the total subarea evaluated) in
the mouth/frontal bar and main outlet sectors, respectively.
The total volumetric loss amounted to 0.24 3 106 m3 in the
frontal bar and 2.16 3 106 m3 in the main outlet (Table 3).
During this period, the main outlet experienced sediment
deficit of .1.1 m (0.27 m y1) (Figure 9). Between 2004 and
2011, depositional areas in the main outlet and mouth/frontal
bar increased in number and size (75% total coverage),
presenting sedimentation volumes of 4.15 3 106 m3 and 0.67
3 106 m3, respectively (Table 3, Figure 9).
Patterns of Erosion and Sedimentation at the Delta
Front
Between 1994 and 2000, erosional and depositional areas
were balanced at the delta front (Table 3). Erosion of up to 4.0 m
(0.66 m y1 ) dominated at the northern (11808 0 00 00 N,
74851 0 30 00 W) and eastern (11808 0 00 00 N, 74851 0 30 00 W) seaward
margins (Figure 10). Patchy areas of erosion were also
identified in the central zone of the delta front, especially
toward the western margin (11807 0 30 00 N, 74851 0 45 00 W) (Figure
10a). In contrast, the sector closest to the river mouth
(11807 0 00 00 N, 74851 0 30 00 W) and the southwestern seaward
margin (11807 0 00 00 N, 74851 0 45 00 W) experienced a sediment
accumulation .1.3 m (0.21 m y1) (Figure 10a). From 2000 to
2008, the erosional/accretional balance changed. Although
erosional areas covered 58% of the total subarea evaluated,
total sediment accumulation of 21.4 3 106 m3 prevailed
compared with 15.9 3 106 m3 of lost sediment (Table 3).
Overall, erosional processes appeared predominantly in the
shallower zones of the eastern shoal. Erosion patches of ~4.0 m
(0.50 m y1) grew or merged over the eastern shoal and
northern seaward margin of the delta front. Significant
sedimentary processes were observed in the deepest zones,
corresponding to the path to the Magdalena Canyon, with an
accumulation .4.5 m (0.56 m y1) being recorded, promoting
the progressive infilling of this pathway (Figure 10). Between
2010 and 2012, sedimentary processes consolidated over the
western margin, especially in the pathway to the Magdalena
Canyon and adjacent areas, which experienced sediment
accumulation of .4.0 m (2.0 m y1) (Figure 10b). In this period,
the depositional areas covered 1.71 km2 (54% of the total
subarea evaluated). The total volumetric gain amounted to 9.99
3 106 m3 (Table 3). Erosion patches were typical of the northern
and southern seaward margins of this sector (Figure 10b).

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 00, No. 0, 0000

0 Restrepo et al.

Figure 8. Suspended particle grain sizes measured at the top of the water
column during (a) November 2012 (high river discharge season) and (b) April
2013 (low river discharge season).

Figure 7. Axial (along-channel) spatial distribution of salinity during the
beginning of the ebb, measured in the Magdalena River outlet: (a, b) high-
discharge and (c, d) low-discharge season.
DISCUSSION
This section presents the analysis and discussion of results
referring to the changes in the sediment transport regime; the
physical processes occurring in the delta; and the magnitude,
causes, and implications of morphological changes in the delta.
Changes in the Sediment Transport Regime
In the Magdalena River stream flow and SSL exhibited
almost the same modes of variability. The annual and 47-year
bands were the first and second sources of hydrologic
variability, respectively (Figure 4). In the Magdalena River,
these periodic oscillations were linked to the annual shift of
ITCZ and ENSO (Restrepo et al., 2014). However, it was
hypothesized that magnitude and phase of these oscillations
106 t y1 and from 29 t y1 to 36 t y1 between 1990 and 2000,
respectively (IDEAM, 2001). Hence, the combined effects of
these anthropogenic interventions and the high oscillatory
activity experienced in the 1990s led to an increase in the Sens
slope of stream flow and thus high annual mean SSLs (Figure 3
and Table 2).
There is evidence that the level of human intervention
declined, or at least remained steady, in the decade of 2000
2010. Deforestation hot spots migrated from the Magdalena
River drainage basin to the southern region and western
Pacific coast of Colombia (Etter et al., 2006). The contribution of
mining in the Magdalena River drainage basin to GDP
remained steady at 23% (SIMCO, 2012). Additionally, only
two new dam reservoirs were built in third-order tributaries of
the Magdalena River. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume
that the dramatic reduction of the annual mean SSL observed
in the early 2000s (,120 3 106 t y1) was induced by the low
annual mean stream flow of ,6600 m3 s1 (Figure 3), indicated
by the power and phase relationship of CWT and XWT,
respectively (Figure 4). The low stream flow was, in turn, the
result of climate-driven shifts (Restrepo et al., 2014) and
presumably, to a lesser degree, of human intervention.
Table 3. Accretion and erosion balances (area and volume) in different
zones of the Magdalena River delta between 1994 and 2012.
Zone/ Bathymetric Data Area (km2) Volume (3106 m3)

also coexist with large-scale anthropogenic impacts. The Comparison Periods Accretion Erosion Accretion Erosion
Magdalena River drainage basin has experienced major human Outlet
interventions in the last 40 years (IDEAM, 2001; Restrepo and 2000 (June)2004 (May) 0.706 1.610 1.888 2.160
Syvitski, 2006). The peak of these interventions appeared in 2004 (May)2011 (July) 1.743 0.572 4.151 1.676
Mouth/Frontal Bar
the 1990s, when almost 70% of the Andean forest and 30% of 1994 (August)2000 (June) 0.243 0.052 0.609 0.054
the Caribbean lowland forest, which covered the Magdalena 2000 (June)2004 (May) 0.101 0.194 0.196 0.243
drainage basin, were cleared as a result of deforestation rates 2004 (May)2011 (July) 0.224 0.071 0.671 0.189
as high as 2.4% of drainage basin area (Etter et al., 2006; Delta Front (I)
1994 (August)2000 (June) 3.221 3.267 6.331 5.003
IDEAM, 2001). Most of the dam reservoirs began to operate at 2000 (June)2008 (April) 2.738 3.750 21.361 15.970
full capacity in the 1990s, resulting in a total water storage Delta Front (II)
capacity of 7.7 3 109 m3, which represents ~93% of the current 1994 (August)2000 (June) 1.575 1.622 2.427 2.343
water storage capacity in the drainage basin. In addition, open- 2000 (June)2008 (April) 2.044 1.154 19.503 6.627
2010 (April)2012 (June) 1.712 1.485 9.991 4.840
pit mining of coal and gold increased from 8 3 106 t y1 to 20 3

Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 00, No. 0, 0000

 Magdalena River DeltaRecent Changes
Figure 9. Comparison of the accretion (positive values) and erosion
(negative values) volumes in the Magdalena River delta for different years
at the (a) outlet and (b) mouth/frontal bar.
Although stream flow and SSL exhibited almost the same
modes of variability (Figure 4), they showed significant
differences in their rates of change (i.e. mean values, significant
trends) (Figure 3 and Table 2). Consequently, it can be assumed
that one of the most important features of the Magdalenas
sediment transport regime is the lack of proportionality in the
variability of stream flow and SSL, as also visible by changes in
the power coefficients, regarding the dominant scales (semian-
nual, annual, and 37-year bands) in the XWT analysis. This
lack of proportionality reflects significant changes in SSC, as
underlined by results of a t test, which showed statistically
significant differences between mean SSC during 19902000
and 20002010 at the 95% confidence level (SSC19902000 0.73
6 0.04 kg m3, SSC20002010 0.65 6 0.01 kg m3; t 9.20, p
7.0 3 106). Sediment retention in lagoons might also
contribute to this lack of proportionality. The lower basin of
the Magdalena River is characterised by gentle slopes (,58)
and a large floodplain (12,144 km2) that houses a complex
network of lagoons and swamps extending over 2596 km2
(IDEAM, 2001). In addition, the movement of tectonic blocks
defines an area of differential subsidence that allows the
progressive infilling with fluvial sediments. van der Hammen
(1986) estimated sedimentation rates between 2.1 mm y1 and
3.0 mm y1 at this site, implying a sediment deposition of 10.73
106 t y1 (5.0 3 106 m3 y1) in the lower basin of the Magdalena
River.
There is limited evidence regarding the net quantitative
effects generated by contrasting impacts (i.e. deforestation and
retention in reservoirs) on SSL variability (Inman and Jenkins,
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 00, No. 0, 0000
0
Figure 10. Comparison of the accretion (positive values) and erosion
(negative values) volumes in the Magdalena River delta for different years
at the (a) delta front (I) and (b) delta front (II).
1999; Liquete et al., 2009; Slattery and Phillips, 2009; Walling
and Fang, 2003), particularly in areas experiencing significant
hydrological shifts, as is the Magdalena River basin (Restrepo
et al., 2014). This reflects the inherent difficulty for separating
the climate and human-induced changes in a highly variable
nonstationary signal. The SSL is a highly variable process that
depends on geological, lithological, hydrological, and anthro-
pogenic factors; these factors, in turn, are interrelated in
nonlinear ways (Harrison, 2000; Milliman and Syvitski, 1992;
Walling and Fang, 2003). Although a distinction between the
net effects of specific drivers on SSL variability is beyond the
scope of this work, the SSL trends (Table 2) and the turbid
plume observed at the Magdalena River mouth (Moreno-
Madrinan et al., 2015) suggest the prevalence of factors
promoting an increase in SSL, and thus the relatively low
efficiency of SSL retention in dams. Besides, the grain-size
distribution of suspended load (Figure 8) would reflect the
effect of deforestation in exposing soils to a more intense
weathering, which in turn would lead to an increase of fine-
particle content in the suspended load. These aspects highlight
the dominance of hydrological shifts and deforestation over
retention in reservoirs and buffering capacity of the basin in
changing sediment transport rates. However, more data
(hydrological, climatological, and land use change) are required
along the entire drainage basin to assess the net quantitative
contribution of each factor to changes in SSL.
0 Restrepo et al.
Sediment Transport Regime: An Approach to Ongoing
Processes in the Delta
Current measurements revealed strong, seasonal, indepen-
dent ebb dominance. The competing mechanisms of advection
and mixing appeared to control the seasonal variations in
stratification. A highly stratified system was observed very
close to the river mouth under low tidal ranges (0.26 m) and
high freshwater discharges. This system shifted upstream
within the low-discharge season. Sediment deposition either
took place in zones with low near-bed shear stress or where the
averaged near-bed current were almost nonexistent, thus
promoting shoaling zones. This mechanism provides a reason-
able explanation for the temporal formation of a frontal bar in
the mouth of the Magdalena River. Similar processes have been
reported in microtidal systems dominated by waves (e.g.,
Cooper, 2001; Maillet et al., 2006; Wright, 1977).
In the Magdalena River delta, a highly stratified estuary
experiencing high stream flow, high freshwater discharges as
buoyancy inputs exert a major influence on the stratified
conditions of the deltaic and adjacent coastal waters, promoting
the transfer of sediments from the river channel to the outer
prodelta through the upper layers of the water column. Similar
patterns have been observed in other deltas (Li et al., 1998a;
Yang et al., 2003). A decline in SSC, as occurred in the 2000
2010 period, would enhance the outflow buoyancy and, hence,
the dispersion of riverine sediment (e.g., Yang et al., 2003;
Yang, Zhao, and Belkin, 2002). Human activities also influence
ongoing processes within the Magdalena River mouth. The
hydraulic efficiency of the channel has increased because of
channel narrowing and restricted lateral erosion. Additionally,
jetty revetment presumably has enhanced the undercutting of
the riverbed because less energy is consumed because of
friction with the riverbanks. Thus, more stress is added to the
riverbed, which is more vulnerable to erosion compared with
the protected riverbank. Shear velocities indicated that bed
scouring might occur even under low discharge conditions
considering the beds grain composition (coarse silty very fine
sand; d50 70.6 lm), which is composed of ,32% of sands
ranging from 130 lm (17%) to 500 lm (2.7%) (Cormagdalena,
2013).
High flow velocities with associated high shear stress trigger
the transport of medium (500 lm) and coarse (5001000 lm)
sands as suspension load and bed load. However, data revealed
that sand in surficial water was ,7.1% of net weight (Figure 8),
noting that coarse sand rarely exceeds 10% of net weight
(Cormagdalena, 2013; NEDECO, 1973). SPM in the uppermost
part of the water column was predominantly composed of silt-
sized particles, regardless of freshwater discharge and flow
conditions (Figure 8). Consequently, sediment supply rate is
almost controlled by fine sediments. The textural information
coincided with core data obtained at the delta front (Klingebiel
and Vernette, 1979), which revealed that sediment deposits
mainly consist of silt (5070%) and fine sand (160 lm, ,10%
of net weight).
Magnitude, Causes, and Implications of Morphological
Changes in the Delta
The standard error of bathymetric data with 0.1-m accuracy
in surveys from 4 to 8 years apart range between 25.0 mm y1 to
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 00, No. 0, 0000
12.5 mm y1. The accuracy and standard error of the applied
bathymetric data were below the range of the calculated rates
of accretion/erosion (Figures 9 and 10), and the data were
therefore considered to be useful for obtaining volumetric
estimates. Net sedimentary balance between accretional and
erosional volumes (Table 3) indicated that, overall, sedimenta-
tion dominated in the Magdalena River delta during the
surveyed period, apart from the river outlet, which underwent
erosion between 2000 and 2004. Average rates of sedimenta-
tion and erosion, ranging between 37 and 822 mm y1 (Figures
9 and 10), as well as high sedimentation rates from specific sites
(2000 mm y1), were of a comparable magnitude with the rates
reported in deltas experiencing severe sediment turnover as a
result of human interventions or large floods (e.g., Gao, Wang,
and Gao, 2011; Maillet et al., 2006; van der Wal, Pye and Neal,
2002; Wang, Hassan, and Xiaoping, 2006; Yang et al., 2003;
Yang, Zhao, and Belkin, 2002).
Thus, morphology of the Magdalena River delta can been
seen as result of supply rate, capacity of marine processes for
resuspension and transport, as well as accommodation space
for sediments. New data on the magnitude of discharge-
induced sediment flux (Table 2 and Figure 3) strengthens the
hypothesis that the river itself is the main source of sediment,
as similarly stated by other authors (e.g., Ercilla et al., 2002;
Klingebiel and Vernette, 1979; Kolla and Buffler, 1985). The
subaqueous portion of the delta appeared to be sensitive to
changes in the sediment transport regime. Morphological
response was not uniform. For instance, erosion became the
dominant process at the mouth/frontal bar between 2000 and
2004, with a shift from a mean sedimentation rate of 320.6 mm
y1 in 19942000 to a mean erosion rate of 39.9 mm y1 in 2000
2004 (Table 3 and Figure 9). At the same time, the riverine SSL
decreased by 30% (Figure 3). Conversely, when riverine SSL
increased from 1123 106 t y1 in 20002004 to 1543 106 t y1 in
20042011 (Figure 3), the mouth/frontal bar and outlet
experienced mean sedimentation rates of 232.5 mm y1 and
152.7 mm y1, respectively (Table 3 and Figure 9). The amount
of annual sediment deposition in the river outlet between 2004
and 2011 (0.59 3 106 m3 y1) was almost equal to the annual
volume of dredged sediment in the river channel between 2001
and 2012, which was estimated to be 0.81 3 106 m3 y1
(Cormagdalena, 2013). In the delta front, changes in SSL were
followed by changes in the magnitude of sedimentation rates
(Table 3 and Figure 10). SSL reduction of 30% between 1994
2000 and 20002008 coincided with an increase in sedimenta-
tion rates at the delta front, from 36.7 to 103.8 mm y1. This
increase was particularly large in the westernmost part of the
delta front (delta front II), where sedimentation rates changed
from 5.1 mm y1 (within the uncertainty range) in 19942000 to
503.2 mm y1 in 20002008 (Table 3). In the latter area,
sedimentation rates increased even more in 20102012 (821.9
mm y1), coinciding with a period of severe floods with high
SSLs (223 3 106 t y1).
These response patterns may reflect spatial differences in
hydrodynamics and sediment transport processes. In the river
outlet, erosional/sedimentary cycles were controlled by the
magnitude of fluvial discharges and riverbed scouring. Under
low discharges (20002004) riverbed scouring was presumably
enhanced because of the channel configuration (the narrow
 Magdalena River DeltaRecent Changes
channel and jetty revetment) and removed sediments were not
replenished by fluvial input. A large proportion of sediment,
deposited within the subaqueous delta front, was affected by
weak tidal currents and low discharge, which in turn led to a
relatively weak buoyant layer. During high freshwater
discharge, sand was deposited in the river outlet, whilst an
enhanced buoyant plume promoted effluent diffusion. Given
flow conditions (i.e. flow velocity, stratification, buoyancy) and
particle size composition, most of the sediment was transferred
to the prodelta and continental shelf. For instance, considering
a dry bulk density of 2.65 g cm3 and a mean porosity of 80%,
the overall net sediment accumulation in the mouth/frontal bar
zone during the 19942011 period was 0.123 106 t y1, whereas
that at the delta front was 2.53 3 106 t y1 during the period of
19942008. Thus, total sediment accumulation in the delta
(including dredging) corresponded to ,5% of the annual mean
SSL of the river (Qs 137144 3 106 t y1). This pattern of
sediment deposition deviates to what occurs in most deltas,
which are considered as the major sink of fluvial sediments in
the long term. Although the proportion of sediment deposited
in the prodelta is relatively low, these deposits constitute the
main source of sediments for the turbidity currents and
landslides observed in the deltaic fan and the Magdalena
canyon (e.g., Ercilla et al., 2002). These latter processes have a
significant effect on the geometry and morphology of the
prodelta, which in turn affect the hydrodynamic regime, as well
as on the structural stability of the engineering structures
(Heezen, 1956; Koopmans, 1971).
The erosion rates observed in the eastern shoal, mainly
between 2000 and 2008 (Figure 10), can be explained by wave
dynamics rather than by changes in the sediment supply.
When sediment deposits reached maximum thickness on top of
the eastern shoal, they were remobilised by swell waves in the
shallower zones (10- to 20-m depth). Predominant swell from
NNE with high waves and long periods (Ortiz et al., 2013)
enhanced, under low discharge, southwestward longshore
sediment transport. New resettlement may be favoured in
the westernmost part of the delta front because of a decrease in
wave-induced currents as a result of the increase of depth (.20
m). Changes in storminess may therefore contribute to changes
in the rate of the infilling of the pathway to Magdalena Canyon
and should consequently be analysed thoroughly.
It is generally expected that the size of a delta decreases as
the SSL is reduced (Syvitski and Saito, 2007; Wang, Hassan,
and Xiaoping, 2006). Regardless of changes in SSL, particu-
larly the decline recorded in 20002004, sedimentation was the
dominant process in the delta front; resulting in progradation
of the Magdalena Delta. This deviation is the outcome of the
combined effects of changes in SSL and river mouth geometry
in regulating delta front morphology. At the river mouth, man-
made structures inhibit the morphological responses to
changes in sediment transport, such as lateral erosion,
formation/abandonment of distributaries due to levee break-
throughs or infilling, lateral shifting of the active channel, or
crevasse planes. Hence, position and size of the frontal bar, the
channel gradient, or the average channel depth must change,
promoting a change in the cross-sectional area. If this area
decreases, the buoyant flows are strengthened, enhancing the
sediment dispersion into the prodelta. The coarse fraction of
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 00, No. 0, 0000
0
fine-sized particles settles in the deepest zones, away from
wave dynamics, whereas the finer fraction is transported into
the outer prodelta. When SSL decreases, the river mouth
undergoes erosion since sediments removed are not replen-
ished, and consequently the cross-sectional area increases and
buoyant flows are weakened; thus the sedimentation takes
place in the closest zones to the river mouth and sediment
supply to the outer prodelta diminishes, as observed in 2000
2004. As a net result, the deepest parts of the delta front will
fill, whereas the shallower areas experience repeated cycles of
erosion/sedimentation. Since changes in the subaerial portion
of the delta are restricted by man-made structures, most of the
changes are observed in the subaqueous portion of the prodelta.
Currently, the main feature of morphological instability in the
river mouth (subaerial portion) corresponds to the formation
and upstream migration of sand spits along the eastern jetty,
triggered by wave refraction and wavecurrent interaction
(Koopmans, 1971).
CONCLUSIONS
Changes in freshwater discharge and linked SSL were
particularly pronounced within the last 20 years. Although
these two parameters exhibited almost the same modes of
variability, their respective responses to large-scale anthropo-
genic impacts appear to modulate the magnitude and phase of
these changes. Consequently, there was a lack of proportion-
ality in the variability of the stream flow and SSL in the
Magdalena River, which in turn led to significant changes in
the sediment transport regime.
The subaqueous part of the delta appeared to be sensitive to
changes in the sediment transport regime. Changes in this
regime led to erosion of the mouth/frontal bar and outlet zones
in the early 2000s, whereas they modified the erosional/
sedimentary balance observed during the 1990s in the
prodelta. The average rates of sedimentation and erosion
(37822 mm y1) were of a comparable magnitude, with rates
reported from deltas experiencing severe sediment turnover.
Progressive infilling of the path to Magdalena Canyon was also
identified. The total sediment accumulation in the delta
corresponded to ,5% of the annual mean SSL of the
Magdalena River. These response patterns reflect the spatial
differences in hydrosedimentary processes. In the river outlet,
erosional/sedimentary cycles are controlled by the magnitude
of fluvial discharge and riverbed scouring. High freshwater
discharge, as buoyancy input, exerts a major influence on the
stratified conditions, promoting the transfer of sediments from
the river channel to the outer prodelta through the upper
layers of the water column. However, the contribution of each
factor cannot be precisely quantified, owing to complex
interactions and feedback mechanism and it deserves further
research.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research was funded by the Research and Projects
Office (DIDI) at Universidad del Norte. The following
institutions provided valuable data: Instituto de Hidrologa,
Meteorologa y Estudios Ambientales (IDEAM, Colombia)
and Centro de Investigaciones Oceanograficas e Hidrograficas
(CIOHDIMAR). The support from a Universidad del Norte
0 Restrepo et al.
Fellowship and CEMarin Fellowship (Colombian Center of
Excellence for Marine Science Research sponsored by the
German Academic Exchange ServiceDAAD) awarded to JCR
is gratefully acknowledged. The authors thank the three
anonymous reviewers for providing valuable comments and
suggestions that greatly improved the manuscript.
LITERATURE CITED
Alvarado, M., 2008. Rio Magdalena: Navegacion Martima y Fluvial
(19862008). Barranquilla, Colombia: Sello editorial de la Uni-
versidad del Norte, 804p.
Asselman, N., 2000. Fitting and interpretation of sediment rating
curves. Journal of Hydrology, 234(1), 228248.
Borda, J.; Palma, M.; Moreno, W.; Davila, A., and Sarta, B., 1973.
Historia de una Gran Obra: Bocas de Ceniza. Barranquilla,
Colombia: Junta Coordinadora del Puerto de Barranquilla, 123p.
Buchanan, J.J. and Somers, W.P., 1969. Discharge measurements at
gauging stations. Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations. 3-
A8.Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, USGS, 65p.
Colby, B. R., 1956. Relationship of Sediment Discharge to Stream
Flow. U.S. Geological Survey Open File Report, Series Number 56-
27. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, USGS,
170p.
Cooper, J., 2001. Geomorphological variability among microtidal
estuaries from wave-dominated South African coasts. Geomorphol-
ogy, 40(1), 99122.
Cormagdalena Staff, 2013. Dragados y Sedimentos en el Rio
Magdalena. Barranquilla, Colombia: Cormagdalena, Radicado
2013301895, 5p.
Dyer, K., 1998. Estuaries: A Physical Introduction. Chichester, U.K.:
Wiley, 195p.
Ercilla, G.; Alonso, B.; Estrada, F.; Chiocci, F.; Baraza, J., and Ferran,
M., 2002. The Magdalena Turbidite System (Caribbean Sea):
Present-day morphology and architecture model. Marine Geology,
185(1), 303318.
Etter, A.; McAlpine C.; Wilson, K.; Phinn, S., and Possingham, A.,
2006. Regional patterns of agricultural land use and deforestation
in Colombia. Agriculture Ecosystems & Environment, 114(2), 369
386.
Fan, H. and Huang, H., 2005. Changes in Huanghe (Yellow) River
estuary since artificial re-routing in 1996. Chinese Journal of
Oceanology and Limnology, 23(9), 299305.
Gao, S.; Wang, Y., and Gao, J., 2011. Sediment retention at the
Changjiang sub-aqueous delta over a 57 year period, in response to
catchment changes. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 95(1),
2938.
Harrison, C.G., 2000. What factors control mechanical erosion rates.
International Journal of Earth Sciences, 88(1), 111.
Heezen, B.C., 1956. Corrientes de turbidez del rio Magdalena. Boletn
de la Sociedad Geologica Colombiana, 51/52, 135143.
Higgins, A.; Restrepo, J.C.; Ortz, J.C.; Pierini, J., and Otero, L., 2015.
Suspended sediment transport in the Magdalena River (Colombia,
South America): Hydrologic regime, rating parameters and
effective discharge variability. International Journal of Sediment
Research. doi:10.1016/j.ijsrc.2015.04.003
IDEAM (Instituto de Hidrologa, Meteorologa y Estudios Ambien-
tales de Colombia), 2001. Estudio Ambiental de la Cuenca
MagdalenaCauca y Elementos para su Ordenamiento Territorial.
Bogota, Colombia: IDEAM, 984p.
IDEAM, 2013. Lineamientos Conceptuales y Metodologicos para la
Evaluacion Regional del Agua. Bogota, Colombia: IDEAM, 275p.
Inman, D. and Jenkins, S., 1999. Climate change and the episodicity
of sediment flux of small California rivers. Journal of Geology,
107(1), 251270.
Kjerfve, B., 1979. Measurements and analysis of water current,
temperature, salinity, and density. In: Dyer, K. (ed.), Estuarine
Hydrography and Sedimentation A Handbook. Cambridge, U.K.:
Cambridge University Press, pp. 186226.
Klingebiel, A. and Vernette, G., 1979. Estudio batim etrico y
sedimentologico en la plataforma continental entre Cartagena y
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 00, No. 0, 0000
la desembocadura del ro Magdalena (Colombia). Boletn Cientfico
CIOH, 5(1), 115.
Kolla, V. and Buffler, R.T., 1985. Morphologic, acoustic, and
sedimentologic characteristics of the Magdalena Fan. Geo-Marine
Letters, 3(1), 8591.
Koopmans, B., 1971. Interpretacion de Fotografas Aereas en
Morfologa Costera: Relacionada con Proyectos de Ingeniera.
Bogota, Colombia: Centro Interamericano de Fotointerpretacion
Ministerio de Obras Publicas, 22p.
Labat, D. 2010. Cross wavelet analyses of annual continental
freshwater discharge and selected climate indices. Journal of
Hydrology, 385(1), 269278.
Lane, A., 2004. Bathymetric evolution of the Mersey Estuary, UK,
19061997: Causes and effects. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf
Science, 59(2), 249263.
Leeder, M., 2011. Sedimentology and Sedimentary Basins: From
Turbulence to Tectonics. Oxford, U.K.: WileyBlackwell, 768p.
Li, G.; Wei, H.; Han, Y., and Chen, Y., 1998a. Sedimentation in the
Yellow River delta, part I: Flow and suspended sediment structure
in the upper distributary and the estuary. Marine Geology, 149(1),
93111.
Li, G.; Wei, H.; Yue, S.; Chen, Y., and Han, Y., 1998b. Sedimentation
in the Yellow River delta, part II: Suspended sediment dispersal
and deposition on the subaqueous delta. Marine Geology, 149(1),
113131.
Liquete, C.; Canals, M.; Ludwig, W., and Arnau, P., 2009. Sediment
discharge of the rivers of Catalonia, NE Spain, and the influence of
human impacts. Journal of Hydrology, 366(1), 7688.
Maillet, G.; Vella, C.; Berne, S.; Friend, P.; Amos, C.; Fleury, T., and
Normand, A., 2006. Morphological changes and sedimentary
processes induced by the December 2003 flood event at the present
mouth of the Grand Rhone River (southern France). Marine
Geology, 234(1), 159177.
Milliman, J.D. and Meade, R.H., 1983. World-wide delivery of river
sediment to the oceans. Journal of Geology, 91(1), 121.
Milliman, J.D. and Syvitski, P.M., 1992. Geomorphic/tectonic control
of sediment discharge to the ocean: The importance of small
mountainous rivers. Journal of Geology, 100(1), 525544.
Milliman, J.D.; Farnsworth, K.; Jones, P.; Xu, K., and Smith, L., 2008.
Climatic and anthropogenic factors affecting river discharge to the
global ocean, 19512000. Global and Planetary Change, 62(34),
187194.
Molinares, C.; Martinez, J.; Fiorini, F.; Escobar, J., and Jaramillo, C.,
2012. Paleoenvironmental reconstruction for the lower Pliocene
Arroyo Piedras section (TubaraColombia): Implications for the
Magdalena Riverpaleodeltas. Journal of South American Earth
Science, 39(1), 170183.
Moreno-Madrinan, M.; Rickman, D.; Ogashawara, I.; Irwin, D.; Ye, J.,
and Al-Hamdan, M., 2015. Using remote sensing to monitor the
influence of river discharge on watershed outlets and adjacent coral
reefs: Magdalena River and Rosario Islands, Colombia. Interna-
tional Journal of Applied Earth Observation and Geoinformation,
38(1), 204215.
NEDECO (Netherlands Engineering Consultants) Staff, 1973. Rio
Magdalena and Canal del Dique Survey ProjectTechnical Report.
The Hague: Netherlands Engineering Consultants, 185p.
Ortiz, J., 2012. Severe tornados on the Caribbean Coast of Colombia
since 2001 and their relation to local climate conditions. Natural
Hazards, 64(2), 18051821.
Ortiz, J.; Otero, L.; Restrepo, J.C.; Ruiz, J., and Cadena, M., 2013.
Characterization of cold fronts in the Colombian Caribbean and
their relationship to extreme wave events. Natural Hazards and
Earth System Sciences, 13(1), 27972804.
Orton, G. and Reading, H., 1993. Variability of deltaic processes in
terms of sediment supply, with particular emphasis on grain-size.
Sedimentology, 40(1), 475512.
Poveda, G. 2004. La hidroclimatologa de Colombia: Una sntesis
desde la escala interdecadal hasta la escala diurna. Revista de la
Academia Colombiana de Ciencias Exactas, Fsicas y Naturales,
28(107), 201222.
Poveda, G.; Jaramillo, A.; Gil M.; Quiceno, N., and Mantilla, R., 2001.
Seasonality in ENSO-related precipitation, river discharges, soil
 Magdalena River DeltaRecent Changes
moisture, and vegetation index in Colombia. Water Resources
Research, 37(8), 21692178.
Restrepo, J.C.; Ortz, J.C.; Pierini, J.; Schrottke, K.; Maza, M.; Otero,
L., and Aguirre, J., 2014. Freshwater discharge into the Caribbean
Sea from the rivers of northwestern South America (Colombia):
Magnitude, variability and recent changes. Journal of Hydrology,
509(1), 266281.
Restrepo, J.D. and Kjerfve, B., 2000. Magdalena River: Interannual
variability (19751995) and revised water discharge and sediment
load estimates. Journal of Hydrology, 235(1), 137149.
Restrepo, J.D. and Lopez, S., 2008. Morphodynamics of the Pacific
and Caribbean deltas of ColombiaSouth America. Journal of
South American Earth Sciences, 25(1), 121.
Restrepo, J.D. and Syvitski, J.P.M., 2006. Assessing the effect of
natural controls and land-use change on sediment yield in a major
Andean river: The Magdalena drainage basin, Colombia. Ambio,
35(1), 4453.
Rowan, J.; Goodwill, P., and Greco, M., 1995. Temporal variability in
catchment sediment yield determined from repeated bathymetric
surveys: Abbeystead Reservoir, U.K. Physics and Chemistry of the
Earth, 20(2), 199206.
Saito, Y.; Yang, Z., and Hori, K., 2001. The Huanghe (Yellow River)
and Changjiang (Yangtze River) deltas: A review on their
characteristics, evolution, and sediment discharge during the
Holocene. Geomorphology, 41(1), 219231.
SIMCO (Sistema de Informacion Minero Colombiano) Staff, 2012. PIB
Minero. Bogota: Sistema de Informacion Minero Colombiano
Ministerio de Minas y Energa Republica de Colombia, 10p.
Slattery, M. and Phillips, J., 2009. Controls on sediment delivery in
coastal plain rivers. Journal of Environmental Management, 92(1),
284289.
Stanley, D. and Warney, A., 1998. Nile delta in its destruction phase.
Journal of Coastal Research, 14(3), 794825.
Syvitski, J.P.M. and Saito, Y., 2007. Morphodynamics of deltas under
the influence of humans. Global and Planetary Changes, 57(3),
261282.
Torrence, C. and Compo, G., 1998. A practical guide to wavelet analysis.
Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, 79(1), 6178.
Traini, C.; Schrottke, K.; Stattegger, K.; Dominguez, J.M.L.; Kacene-
lenbogen Guimaraes, J.; Vital, H.; Davila Beserra, D., and Aquino
Da Silva, A.G., 2012. Morphology of subaqueous dunes at the
mouth of the river dammed Sao Francisco (Brazil). Journal of
Coastal Research, 28(1), 15801590.
van der Hammen, 1986. Fluctuaciones holocenicas del nivel de
inundaciones en la cuenca del bajo Magdalena-Cauca-San Jorge
(Colombia). Geologa Norandina, 10(1), 1117.
Journal of Coastal Research, Vol. 00, No. 0, 0000
View publication stats
0
van der Wal, D.; Pye, K., and Neal, A., 2002. Long-term morphological
change in the Ribble Estuary, northwest England. Marine Geology,
189(3), 249266.
Vernette, G.; Mauffret, A.; Bobier, C.; Briceno, L., And Gayet, J.,
1992. Mud diapirism, fan sedimentation and strike-slip faulting,
Caribbean Colombian margin. Tectonophysics, 202(1), 335335.
Walling, D. and Fang, D., 2003. Recent trends in the suspended
sediment loads of the worlds rivers. Global and Planetary Change.
39(1), 111126.
Wang, H.; Yang, Z.; Saito, Y.; Liu, P.; Sun, X., and Wang, Y., 2007.
Stepwise decreases of the Huanghe (Yellow River) sediment load
(19502005): Impacts of climate change and human activities.
Global and Planetary Change, 57(3), 331354.
Wang, H.; Bi, N.; Saito, Y.; Wang, Y.; Sun, X.; Zhang, J., and Yang, Z.,
2010. Recent changes in sediment delivery by the Huanghe (Yellow
River) to the sea: Causes and environmental implications in its
estuary. Journal of Hydrology, 391(3), 302313.
Wang, S.; Hassan, M., and Xiaoping, X., 2006. Relationship between
suspended sediment load, channel geometry and land area
increment in the Yellow River Delta. Catena, 65(3), 302314.
Wright, L., 1977. Sediment transport at river mouths: A synthesis.
Geological Society American Bulletin, 88(1), 857868.
Wright, L. and Coleman, J., 1973. Variation in morphology of major
deltas as a function of ocean wave and river discharge regimes.
American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, 57(1), 177
205.
Xu, J., 2002. River sedimentation and channel adjustment of the
lower Yellow River as influenced by low discharges and seasonal
channel dry-ups. Geomorphology, 43(1), 151164.
Yang, S.; Zhao, Q., and Belkin, I., 2002. Temporal variation in the
sediment load of the Yangtze river and the influences of human
activities. Journal of Hydrology, 263(1), 5671.
Yang, S.; Belkin, I.; Belkina, A.; Zhao, Q.; Zhu, J., and Ding, P., 2003.
Delta response to decline in sediment supply from the Yangtze
River: Evidence of the recent four decades and expectations for the
next half-century. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 57(1),
689699.
Yue, S.; Pilon, P., and Cavadias, G., 2002. Power of the MannKendall
and Spearmans rho test to detecting monotonic trends in
hydrological series. Journal of Hydrology, 259(1), 254271.
Zhang, S.; Lu, X.; Higgit, D.; Chen, Ch.; Han, J., and Sun, H., 2008.
Recent changes of water discharge and sediment load in the
Zhujiang (Pearl River) basin, China. Global and Planetary Change,
60(1), 365380.