A Short-term Study of the Effects of a Habitat Improvement Programme on the Distribution and Abundance of Fish Stocks in a Small Lowland River in Shropshire

Swales, Stephen; O’Hara, K.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2109.1983.tb00063.x

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Swales and O'Hara (1983) Landscape Ecol Eng (2010) 6: 289-305 297 reported that abundance of dace (Leuciscus leuciscus) and chub (Leuciscus cephalus) increased at the improvement sites after installation of structures, while dace, chub, and roach (Rutilus rutilus) used the floating cover structures favorably.…”

Section: Moderately Sized Low-gradient Streamsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fish habitat rehabilitation using wood in the world

Nagayama

Nakamura

2009

Landscape Ecol Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To provide river managers and researchers with practical knowledge about fish rehabilitation, various studies of fish habitat rehabilitation that used wood were reviewed. The review focuses on fish responses, wood installation methods, and geomorphic features of the rehabilitation sites. Most studies were conducted in moderately sized (small and medium) streams with relatively high bed gradients and aimed to improve the habitats of salmonid species. In this stream type, structures spanning the full (log dam) and partial (log deflector) width of the river were most common, and wood structures that created pools and covers were successful in improving fish habitat. Some projects were conducted in moderately sized lowgradient streams, in which wooden devices used to create instream cover were effective for fish assemblages. There were few studies in other aquatic ecosystems. However, well-designed large wood structures, known as engineered log jams, were used in rehabilitation projects for large rivers. In slack-water or lentic systems such as sidechannels, estuaries, and reservoirs, small and large wood structures that created cover were used to improve habitat for many fish species. For successful fish habitat rehabilitation projects, the hydrogeomorphic conditions of rehabilitation sites should be carefully examined to avoid physical failure of wood structures. Although artificial wood structures can be used to improve fish habitat in various aquatic ecosystems, they should be considered to be a complementary or interim habitat enhancement technique. The recovery of natural dynamic processes at the watershed scale is the ultimate target of restoration programs.

show abstract

Section: Moderately Sized Low-gradient Streamsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fish habitat rehabilitation using wood in the world

Nagayama

Nakamura

2009

Landscape Ecol Eng

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…(Grandmottet, 1983) ; see text for method of calculation. Low values = narrow range of acceptable habitats, high values = wide range of acceptable habitats Other, more specific studies have shown the importance of physical cover for L. cephalus (Swales & O'Hara, 1983) ; the use of fast flows, eddies, and turbulent water by A . aspius, with the largest adults (3 to 6 kg) occurring in the centre of the river where flows were locally accelerated (Pennanen, 1991) ; and the use by P phoxinus of horizontal cover in channel depths >30 cm (Bless, 1992) .…”

Section: Other Microhabitat Requirements Offish Larvaementioning

confidence: 99%

Environmental requirements of European non-salmonid fish in rivers

Mann¹

1996

Hydrobiologia

117

110

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Most studies validate the relationship between cover abundance and fish density or biomass, principally of salmonid species (BOUSSU, 1954;SAUNDERS and SMITH, 1962;HOUSE and BOEHNE, 1985;DOLLOFF, 1986;ELLIOT, 1986;RILEY et al, 1992;LIM et al, 1993;RONI and QUINN, 2001b) but also of cyprinid species (SWALES and O'HARA, 1983;THÉVENET, 1998). But in contrast, and KEITH et al (1998) found that the summer distribution of juvenile salmonids (Oncorhynchus kisutch, Salvelinus malma) was not or little affected by the presence of cover.…”

Section: Effects Of Cover Structures On Biological Productivitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Nature and Functions of Cover for Riverine Fish.

Allouche¹

2002

Bull. Fr. Pêche Piscic.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This review attempts to assess the nature and the role of cover for riverine fish assemblages. Although early identified as a key factor for fish distribution, especially for salmonids, cover (i.e. woody debris, undercut banks, boulders, turbidity...) still remains the variable least considered in the studies of fish habitat relationships. This is mainly due to the diversity of ecological functions of cover structures in fish assemblages. Cover structures are structuring components of fish habitat and contribute to the biological productivity of streams. But, at the individual scale, cover fulfils three main functions: protection against predators, visual isolation reducing competition, and hydraulic shelter. In fact, the use of cover by fish results from a trade-off between the costs and the benefits associated with its use. Although the relationships between fish and cover appear extremely complex and context-specific, a growing body of evidence highlights the potential role of cover for management purposes.Key-words : cover, shelter, riverine fish, fish habitat. NATURE ET FONCTIONS DU COUVERT POUR LES POISSONS LOTIQUES. RÉSUMÉCet article décrit la typologie ainsi que les fonctions du couvert pour les poissons lotiques. Identifié très tôt comme un facteur explicatif de la distribution des poissons, principalement chez les salmonidés, le couvert (i.e. débris ligneux, sous-berges, blocs, turbidité...) demeure néanmoins la variable la moins considérée dans l'étude des relations habitat-poissons. Ceci s'explique notamment par les fonctions écologiques très diverses que le couvert remplit vis-à-vis des assemblages piscicoles. Les structures pourvoyeuses de couvert sont des agents structurants de l'habitat piscicole et contribuent à la productivité biologique des cours d'eau. Au niveau du microhabitat du poisson, le couvert remplit trois fonctions majeures : anti-prédation, isolation visuelle limitant la compétition, et abri hydraulique. En fait, l'utilisation du couvert par les poissons résulte d'un compromis entre les coûts et les bénéfices associés d'où l'extrême complexité de cette relation qui semble plutôt spécifique à un contexte donné. Malgré les difficultés d'extrapolation, de nombreux travaux mettent en évidence la signification écologique ainsi que l'utilisation potentielle du couvert pour une gestion optimale des ressources piscicoles.Mots-clés : couvert, abri, poissons lotiques, habitat piscicole.

show abstract

A Short-term Study of the Effects of a Habitat Improvement Programme on the Distribution and Abundance of Fish Stocks in a Small Lowland River in Shropshire

Cited by 9 publications

References 11 publications

Fish habitat rehabilitation using wood in the world

Fish habitat rehabilitation using wood in the world

Environmental requirements of European non-salmonid fish in rivers

Nature and Functions of Cover for Riverine Fish.

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About