COMPARISON OF SEDIMENT SIZES ZYLINSKI 1

Comparison of Beach Sediment Grain-Sizes Between a Replenished and Non-Replenished

Beach Located in Long Beach Island, NJ
Morgan Zylinski
Research Methods/Field Ecology 2023

Abstract
Characterization of beach grain sediments and distribution patterns are vital factors for analyzing
sedimentary processes among beach systems. At two different beach locations on Long Beach
Island, New Jersey, a student team of 14 researchers collected a total of 30 100g sand sediment
samples. On April 25, 2023 samples were collected from Ship Bottom beach, and on May 11,
2023 samples were collected from Harvey Cedars beach. After collection the sand samples were
then sieved into distinctive classifications using set phi sizes. Conductivity was also gathered
from the samples to create inferences about the porosity of the sediments. It was determined that
the replenished beach exhibited higher amounts of fine grain sizes, as well as coarser sediments
located in zones near the waterline. Medium-fine grain sizes were observed on the unreplenished
beach in Ship Bottom. This is likely due to the increased width of the beach, allotting for a
dispersal of wave energy. This is in comparison to the replenished beach where wave energy is
more concentrated. Conductivity in total of both beaches displayed a slightly strong negative
correlation. This information can be used to assist in future research and replenishment of
beaches, with known characterization of the beach sediments.

Introduction
Characterization of sediment grain-size distribution and parameters are significant factors
for analyzing the sedimentary environment and processes (Folk and Ward 1957; Gao-song et al.,
2013). Grains-size measurements can exhibit distributions in sizes from very fine sand to very
coarse sand (0.0625mm - 2mm); as well as some particles distributed into the coarse silt type
(0.031mm - 0.0625mm) (Wentworth, 1922; University of Hawaii, 2016). The dynamic beach
system is constantly influenced by longshore currents, wave energy, offshore currents, and
winds. Coarser-grained beaches are observed to have more concentrated wave energy, while
finer-grained beaches are characterized by a wider surf zone and dispersed wave energy
(Edwards, 2001; National Park Service, 2019). Several characteristics of the beach sediment
have influences on outside factors including porosity– available space between sand sediments
based on sorting (Fraser, 1935; Schwyter & Vaughn, 2020). Porosity can impact the electrical
conduction of soil by providing more space for water (Cathles III, 1998; Hawkins et al., 2017).
Measuring conductivity among the collected beach samples can assist in analyzing these sand
sediment characteristics.
COMPARISON OF SEDIMENT SIZES ZYLINSKI 2

Beach nourishment used as a coastal management tool has become a response to combat
coastal erosion, promote tourism, reduce storm damages, and dissipate wave energy (Davidson
1992; Valverde 1999). Beach restoration leads to a refinement of beach sediment as coarser
sediment remained on the higher zones of the beach and finer sediments migrated to lower beach
and subtidal zones (Eitner and Ragutski 1994; Blot et al., 2004). However, beach replenishment
can have several detrimental ecological implications for the intertidal invertebrate community
(Peterson and Bishop, 2005; Wooldridge et al., 2016).
The focus of this study is to create a comparison of beach grain-size between a often
replenished beach and a non-replenished beach. Analyzing the sorting of beach sediment can
assist in understanding the characteristics of each beach, and observing the differences between
wave energy and sediment transportation; assessing the effects of the beach replenishment. This
information can be used to assist in future research and replenishments on each beach, once
knowledge of its sedimentary patterns have been discerned.

Methodology
In this study, a team of 16 researchers from the Marine Academy of Technology and
Environmental Science collected beach sediment samples from two beach locations on Long
Beach Island, NJ. Sand samples were taken on April 25, 2023 from Ship Bottom beach and on
May 11, 2023 from Harvey Cedars beach. Beaches in Harvey Cedars have undergone a beach
replenishment project where initial nourishment was completed in 2010. The most recent
nourishment took place in 2018, and most recent replenishment was projected for 2023 (New
Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, 2023). Sediments for replenishment are taken
from mainland locations. Beaches in Ship Bottom have not undergone nourishment projects.
During sample dates the width of the Harvey Cedars beach was 61 feet while the Ship Bottom
beach was recorded at 154 feet. Each beach was sectioned into four separate vertical sections
from the waterline to the dune line. The difference in meters between each zone is displayed in
Table 1. On both beaches three 100g sand samples were collected from each zone using a 6 cm
diameter soil corer, and zone site coordinates were collected using a Garmin 73 GPS. A total of
24 sediment samples were collected across both beaches. After collection, each sand sample was
dried out for at least 24 hours before sieving each sample using a Ro-Tap Cascade Sieve Shaker
for two minutes. Sediments shaken in the separately sized mm sieve panels were each weighed
COMPARISON OF SEDIMENT SIZES ZYLINSKI 3

using a OHAUS Analytical Balance. Sediments were all ordered into separate grain-size
classifications using the Wentworth (1922) scale. 15ml of each sand sample were also washed
with two parts distilled water and tested for conductivity using a YSI 85 multimeter.

Figure 1: Sand sample locations taken from each beach. Left: Ship Bottom Beach. Right:
Harvey Cedars. Ship Bottom samples were taken on 4/25/23; Harvey Cedars samples
taken on 5/11/23.

Figure 2: Map displaying location of Figure 3: Map displaying location of both

Long Beach Island in relation to beach locations. Northernmost point
Ocean County (yellow) and the New represents Ship Bottom and the
Jersey Border. southernmost point represents Harvey
Cedars.
COMPARISON OF SEDIMENT SIZES ZYLINSKI 4

Table 1: Beach zonation distances from waterline (meters) on Harvey Cedars and Ship
Bottom beach.

Results
Across all four sampled zones on the Ship Bottom beach total sediment weights of very
coarse sand ranged from 0g -1.76g; coarse sand weights ranged from 0.0366g - 15.478g; medium
sand weights ranged from 19.84g - 79.49g; fine sand weights ranged from 6.26g - 75.88g; very
fine sand weights ranged from 0g - 3.90g. Across the four sampled zones on the beach at Harvey
Cedars, total sediment weights of very coarse sand ranged from 0g - 8.40g; coarse sand weights
ranged from 0.14g - 23.69g; medium sand weights ranged from 19.47g - 84.96g; fine sand
weights ranged from 4.98g - 74.89g; very fine sand weights ranged from 0.01g - 4.85g. Figures
4 - 7 display the comparison between the averages of the characterized sediment weights.
ANOVA single factor tests to compare the two locations determined there was no significance
between any averages. The furthest sample site from the waterline was 73 meters. Conductivity
values ranged from 18.4 microSiemens (µS) to 4840 µS. Figure 8 displayed the correlation
between sand conductivity and distance (meters) from the waterline. An ANOVA Regression test
determined that there was a strong negative correlation; R2 = 0.616.
COMPARISON OF SEDIMENT SIZES ZYLINSKI 5

Figure 4: Mean comparison of Zone 1 total grain-size sediment weight between Ship Bottom
and Harvey Cedars, NJ. (g) (n=30). (ANOVA: very coarse: p=0.3471; coarse: p=0.4822;
medium: p=0.9851 fine: p=0.9480; very fine: p=0.7190; ɑ=0.05; ±5%).

Figure 5: Mean comparison of Zone 2 total grain-size sediment weight between Ship Bottom
and Harvey Cedars, NJ. (g) (n=30). (ANOVA: very coarse: p=0.1671; coarse: p=0.8940;
medium: p=0.6783 fine: p=0.6782; very fine: p=0.3910; ɑ=0.05; ±5%).
COMPARISON OF SEDIMENT SIZES ZYLINSKI 6

Figure 6: Mean comparison of Zone 3 total grain-size sediment weight between Ship Bottom
and Harvey Cedars, NJ. (g) (n=30). (ANOVA: very coarse: p=0.5810; coarse: p=0.8248;
medium: p=0.9315 fine: p=0.9413; very fine: p=0.8567; ɑ=0.05; ±5%).

Figure 7: Mean comparison of Zone 4 total grain-size sediment weight between Ship Bottom
and Harvey Cedars, NJ. (g) (n=30). (ANOVA: very coarse: p=0.4553; coarse: p=0.4310;
medium: p=0.7260; fine: p=0.6153; very fine: p=0.5434; ɑ=0.05; ±5%).
COMPARISON OF SEDIMENT SIZES ZYLINSKI 7

Figure 8: Correlation between conductivity (µS) and distance from waterline (meters) in Harvey
Cedars and Ship Bottom. (n=21) A slight strong negative correlation between conductivity and
distance from the waterline is displayed. (ANOVA Regression: R2=0.616; p<0.001).

Discussion
The correlation between conductivity and sand distance from the waterline displayed in
Figure 8 had been determined to have a slightly strong negative correlation. Conclusions to this
data collected is likely due to the decreased porosity of sediments near the shoreline. Higher
porosity levels are often associated with coarser sands while lower porosity is found within finer
sand grains (Kamann et al., 2007; Our Planet Today, 2022). Figure 8 supports these observations
as the average grain size decreases from inshore towards backshore (Edwards 2001, Bujan et al.,
2007). Refinement of sand sediments across beach samples taken from Harvey Cedars is due to
finer grain sizes of borrowed mainland sediment (Eitner and Ragutski 1994; Pagan et al., 2018).
However, an increase in coarse sediments on the replenished beach was observed in zones close
to the waterline (Zones 1 & 2). Average grain sizes were observed to have increased from the
inshore to the backshore. This could be due to decreased wave energy on replenished beaches
whereas the sandbar has been pushed back, absorbing the wave energy (Davidson et al., 1992;
COMPARISON OF SEDIMENT SIZES ZYLINSKI 8

NPS, 2019). Average high amounts of medium-fine sand was observed on the non-replenished
beach, Ship Bottom. This is likely due to the greater width of the beach, and the dispersal of
wave energy allotting for finer sand sediments (Pilkey et al., 2004; Mcfall, 2019). However, as
the nourished beach progresses it is presumed that hydrodynamic conditions will bring the
artificially replenished beach back into its original profile (Eitner and Ragutski 1994; Ely and
Searcy, 2020).

Conclusion
In conclusion trends among the dispersion of beach sediments across replenished and non
replenished beaches were observed. High amounts of medium and fine sediments were collected
among both sampled beaches. Analyzation of the amounts of refined and coarse sediment
provided conclusive evidence about the wave energy and its dispersal due to the width of the
beaches. This information can be used to assist in future research and replenishment of beaches,
with known characterization of their sediments.

Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Mr. Kelsey, the research advisor, for providing the study with all
necessary tools and materials to complete the study. I would also like to thank my diligent peers
with their help of collection and analysis of the data.
COMPARISON OF SEDIMENT SIZES ZYLINSKI 9

References
Beach Basics - Coastal Care. (2010, April 13). Coastalcare.org.
https://coastalcare.org/educate/beach-basics/#:~:text=Beaches%20with%20finer%20grain
%20sizes%20tend%20to%20be
Chiva, L., Pagán, J. I., López, I., Tenza-Abril, A. J., Aragonés, L., & Sánchez, I. (2018). The
effects of sediment used in beach nourishment: Study case El Portet de Moraira beach.
Science of the Total Environment, 628-629, 64–73.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2018.02.042
Cui, G. S., Liu, T., & Cui, Y. (2013). The Comparative Study of Grain-Size Parameter Derived
from Graphical and Moment Methods. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 291-294,
2878–2884. https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/amm.291-294.2878
Davison, A. T., Nicholls, R. J., & Leatherman, S. P. (1992). Beach Nourishment as a Coastal
Management Tool: An Annotated Bibliography on Developments Associated with the
Artificial Nourishment of Beaches. Journal of Coastal Research, 8(4), 984–1022.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4298052
Edwards, A. C. (2001). Grain Size and Sorting in Modern Beach Sands. Journal of Coastal
Research, 17(1), 38–52. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4300148
Eitner, V., & Ragutzki, G. (1994). Effects of Artificial Beach Nourishment on Nearshore
Sediment Distribution (Island of Norderney, Southern North Sea). Journal of Coastal
Research, 10(3), 637–650. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4298259
Ely, A., & Searcy, S. (2020). Beach Replenishment and Impacts on Beach Ecosystems. Research
Week. https://digital.sandiego.edu/osp-researchweek/2020/ccurc/23/
Folk, R. L., & Ward, W. C. (1957). Brazos River bar [Texas]; a study in the significance of grain
size parameters. Journal of Sedimentary Research, 27(1), 3–26.
https://doi.org/10.1306/74d70646-2b21-11d7-8648000102c1865d
Fraser, H. J. (1935). Experimental Study of the Porosity and Permeability of Clastic Sediments.
The Journal of Geology, 43(8), 910–1010. https://www.jstor.org/stable/30058422
Hawkins, E., Fulton, J., & Port, K. (2017). Using Soil Electrical Conductivity (EC) to Delineate
Field Variation. Ohioline.osu.edu.
https://ohioline.osu.edu/factsheet/fabe-565#:~:text=Porosity%20%E2%80%93%20Porosi
ty%20can%20impact%20the%20conduction%20of
COMPARISON OF SEDIMENT SIZES ZYLINSKI
10
Kamann, P. J., Ritzi, R. W., Dominic, D. F., & Conrad, C. M. (2007). Porosity and Permeability
in Sediment Mixtures. Ground Water, 45(4), 429–438.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6584.2007.00313.x
McFall, B. C. (2019). The Relationship between Beach Grain Size and Intertidal Beach Face
Slope. Journal of Coastal Research, 35(5), 1080.
https://doi.org/10.2112/jcoastres-d-19-00004.1
National Park Service. (2019a). Effects of Grain Size and Slope (U.S. National Park Service).
Www.nps.gov. https://www.nps.gov/articles/effects-of-grain-size-and-slope.htm
National Park Service. (2019b, April 8). Beach Nourishment (U.S. National Park Service).
Www.nps.gov. https://www.nps.gov/articles/beach-nourishment.htm
NJ DEP. (2023). NJDEP | Division of Coastal Engineering | Current Projects. Www.nj.gov.
https://www.nj.gov/dep/shoreprotection/projects.htm
Our Planet Today. (2022, April 16). Which would have a higher porosity a well sorted sediment
or a poorly sorted sediment? - Our Planet Today. Our Planet Today.
https://geoscience.blog/which-would-have-a-higher-porosity-a-well-sorted-sediment-or-a
-poorly-sorted-sediment/#:~:text=Unconsolidated%20sediments%20tend%20to%20have
%20higher%20porosity%20than
Pilkey, O. H., & Clayton, T. D. (1989). Summary of Beach Replenishment Experience on U.S.
East Coast Barrier Islands. Journal of Coastal Research, 5(1), 147–159.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4297507?searchText=&searchUri=&ab_segments=&searchK
ey=&refreqid=fastly-default%3A6d86097b5c352889914aaf211162d2d2
Pilkey, O. H., Tracy Monegan Rice, & Neal, W. J. (2014). How to Read a North Carolina Beach.
UNC Press Books.
Revil, A., Cathles, L. M., Losh, S., & Nunn, J. A. (1998). Electrical conductivity in shaly sands
with geophysical applications. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth, 103(B10),
23925–23936. https://doi.org/10.1029/98jb02125
Schwyter, A. R., & Vaughn, K. (2021, June 13). 5.2: Bulk Density, Porosity, Particle Density of
Soil. Geosciences LibreTexts.
https://geo.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Soil_Science/Introduction_to_Soil_Science_Labor
atory_Manual_(Schwyter_and_Vaughan)/05%3A_Soil_Physics_and_Water_Relations/5.
02%3A_Bulk_Density_Porosity_Particle_Density_of_Soil
COMPARISON OF SEDIMENT SIZES ZYLINSKI
11
University of Hawaii. (2016). Beaches and Sand | manoa.hawaii.edu/ExploringOurFluidEarth.
Manoa.hawaii.edu.
https://manoa.hawaii.edu/exploringourfluidearth/physical/coastal-interactions/beaches-an
d-sand#:~:text=Sediments%20with%20smaller%20grain%20sizes%20are%20classified
%20as
Valverde, H. R., Trembanis, A. C., & Pilkey, O. H. (1999). Summary of Beach Nourishment
Episodes on the U.S. East Coast Barrier Islands. Journal of Coastal Research, 15(4),
1100–1118. https://www.jstor.org/stable/4299028
Woodruff, J. D., Venti, N. L., Mabee, S. B., DiTroia, A. L., & Beach, D. (2021). Grain size and
beach face slope on paraglacial beaches of New England, USA. Marine Geology, 438,
106527. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.margeo.2021.106527
Wooldridge, T., Henter, H. J., & Kohn, J. R. (2016). Effects of beach replenishment on intertidal
invertebrates: A 15-month, eight beach study. Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science, 175,
24–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecss.2016.03.018