2022
DOI: 10.1002/eco.2513
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Catchment‐scale applications of hydraulic habitat models: Climate change effects on fish

Abstract: Approaches available for estimating the ecological impacts of climate change on aquatic communities in river networks range from detailed mechanistic models applicable locally to correlative approaches applicable globally. Among them, hydraulic habitat models (HABMs) link hydraulic models of streams with biological models that reflect how organisms select microhabitat hydraulics. Coarser but more general species distribution models (SDMs) predict changes in geographic distributions; they

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2023
2023
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

1
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 73 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Uncertainty is propagated at various layers in the modelling chain starting from the SWAT+ estimations of discharge time series, velocity and discharge measurements, which are subsequently used in the hydraulic modelling calibration as well as the uncertainty in the preference curve inputs to the CASiMiR model. Considering all sources of uncertainty in such integrated modelling would be challenging, if not impossible (Morel et al, 2023); however, we may try to assess the pair‐wise uncertainty propagation. For example, the PBIAS of 15% (validation) for average flow scenario in SWAT+ translated into 0.08 m error of the water level, which is even higher than the reported value of the RMSE (0.06 m for validation).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Uncertainty is propagated at various layers in the modelling chain starting from the SWAT+ estimations of discharge time series, velocity and discharge measurements, which are subsequently used in the hydraulic modelling calibration as well as the uncertainty in the preference curve inputs to the CASiMiR model. Considering all sources of uncertainty in such integrated modelling would be challenging, if not impossible (Morel et al, 2023); however, we may try to assess the pair‐wise uncertainty propagation. For example, the PBIAS of 15% (validation) for average flow scenario in SWAT+ translated into 0.08 m error of the water level, which is even higher than the reported value of the RMSE (0.06 m for validation).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, we have considered time series of natural daily discharge simulated by the distributed hydrological model J2000 (Morel et al, 2023) over the period 1980-2016. The version of J2000 used here considers natural hydrological processes and was calibrated at the whole Rhone basin scale to simulate daily discharges at the outlet of medium-scale basins.…”
Section: Data Used For the Hydrological Analysis Of The Bonnegarde An...mentioning
confidence: 99%