Flow and Habitat Effects on Juvenile Fish Abundance in Natural and Altered Flow Regimes

Freeman, Mary C.; Bowen, Zachary H.; Bovee, Ken D.; Irwin, Elise R.

doi:10.2307/3061065

Cited by 128 publications

(179 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

173

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Nevertheless, most model approaches base their assessment on physical-chemical water quality or the habitat suitability of adult fish (e.g., Ruetz and Jennings [32]; Freeman et al [31]; Cerny et al [62]; Grand et al [55]; Hatten et al [22]; Garcia et al [18]; Li et al [99]; Cioffi and Gallerano [112]; Chen et al [131]; Wang et al [25]), including often purely the most common and economic valuable species (e.g., trout, salmon) or endangered species. One publication considered the impact of flow regulation on algae [38]; one paper focused on the effect on habitat suitability of amphibians [26]; and just three papers considered macroinvertebrates [25,37,115] in their assessment.…”

Section: Weaknessesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, the type of model implemented, the variables included and the parameterization used strongly differ between different studies. For instance, Freeman et al [31], Ruetz and Jennings [32] and Rosenfeld et al [33] used depth, substrate and flow characteristics as input variables in order to assess the impact of altered flow regimes on the habitat suitability of juvenile fish. Kunz [34] used dissolved oxygen and nutrient compounds as input variables to develop a water quality model taking into account the impact of a tropical reservoir.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Modelling Tools to Analyze and Assess the Ecological Impact of Hydropower Dams

Nguyen

Everaert

Boets

et al. 2018

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:We critically analyzed a set of ecological models that are used to assess the impact of hydropower dams on water quality and habitat suitability for biological communities. After a literature search, we developed an integrated conceptual model that illustrates the linkages between the main input variables, model approaches, the output variables and biotic-abiotic interactions in the ecosystems related to hydropower dams. We found that variations in water flow and water depth coupled with increased nutrient availability are major variables that contribute to structural and functional ecosystem changes. We also found that ecological models are an important tool to assess the impact of hydropower dams. For instance, model simulation of different scenarios (e.g., with and without the dam, different operation methods) can analyze and predict the related ecosystem shifts. However, one of the remaining shortcomings of these models is the limited capacity to separate dam-related impacts from other anthropogenic influences (e.g., agriculture, urbanization). Moreover, collecting sufficient high-quality data to increase the statistical power remains a challenge. The severely altered conditions (e.g., generation of very deep lakes) also lead to difficulties for standardized data collection. We see future opportunities in the integration of models to improve the understanding of the different processes affected by hydropower dam development and operation, as well as the use of remote sensing methods for data collection.

show abstract

Section: Weaknessesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Modelling Tools to Analyze and Assess the Ecological Impact of Hydropower Dams

Nguyen

Everaert

Boets

et al. 2018

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Brittain and Saltveit 1989;Lavandier 1998), fish populations (e.g. Cushman 1985;Freeman et al 2001), periphyton and mosses (e.g. Brittain and Saltveit 1989), and aquatic macrophytes and riverbank vegetation (Vibert 1939).…”

Section: Problematic Nature Of Hydropeakingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hydropeaking indicators for characterization of the Upper-Rhone River in Switzerland

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

River channelization and the construction of high-head storage schemes have been the basis of agricultural and socio-economic development in many alpine regions. One example is the Upper-Rhone River in Switzerland. The Upper-Rhone's morphology changed considerably between 1863 and 1960 as a result of two major channelizations and, from 1950 on, the construction of a large number of high-head storage hydropower schemes in the catchment. These modifications have brought large benefits to the local population, at the cost, however, of substantial disturbances in aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems in and along the river. A primary factor behind these disturbances is the alteration of the natural flow regime, namely hydropeaking due to the operation of the high-head storage hydropower plants. For sustainable river-restoration projects on regulated rivers, scientists and engineers now widely accept the necessity of integrated management of the river. Different aspects such as river morphology, sediment management, water quality, temperature, and the naturally variable flow regime should be considered simultaneously. Mitigation of non-natural, subdaily flow fluctuations due to hydropeaking is a crucial step in restoring natural flow regimes, but is especially challenging due to the economic constraints such mitigation places upon hydropower plants. With the goal of addressing this challenge, this paper proposes three indicators to describe the flow regime of rivers in alpine catchments with and without high-head storage hydropower plants. The indicators quantify: (1) the seasonal distribution and transfer of water, (2) sub-daily flow fluctuations, and (3) the intensity and frequency of flow changes. Indicators are evaluated in a case study of the Upper-Rhone River for preand post-impact situations, and the benefit of a multipurpose project reducing hydropeaking on hydrologic conditions is quantified. Furthermore, the paper explores the possibility of using these indicators to link aquatic and terrestrial ecosystem well being to their hydrology.

show abstract

“…As a result, many investigators have focused on the magnitude and frequency of peak events and their direct effects on biotic communities (Townsend et al 1997, Death and Zimmermann 2005, Greenwood and Booker 2014. Fluctuations in discharge can cause mortality directly through high-and low-flow events, but they also influence temperature, nutrient availability, food resources, habitat structure, and species interactions (Peckarsky et al 1990, Stanley et al 1994, Freeman et al 2001, Allan and Castillo 2007. All of these factors can affect aquatic community composition.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Environment shapes invertebrate assemblage structure differences between volcanic spring-fed and runoff rivers in northern California

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Flow variability plays an important role in structuring lotic communities, yet comparatively little is known about processes governing assemblage dynamics in stream ecosystems with stable environmental conditions, such as spring-fed rivers. Volcanic spring-fed rivers (hereafter spring-fed rivers) occur in geologically active landscapes of the western USA and around the globe. We sampled invertebrate assemblages and quantified primary productivity and habitat characteristics of spring-fed and runoff rivers in northern California over 4 seasons. We predicted that abiotic factors would be more stable and nutrient availability greater and that invertebrate density would be greater and diversity lower in spring-fed than in runoff rivers. Runoff rivers exhibited high variability in discharge and temperature, whereas spring-fed rivers were relatively stable with high naturally occurring nutrient levels. On average, NO 3 − and PO 4 3− concentrations were 40× greater in spring-fed than in runoff rivers. Spring-fed rivers supported nearly 7 to 16× greater densities of invertebrates than runoff systems, depending on season. However, invertebrate species richness was greater in runoff rivers in all seasons. Spring-fed river invertebrate assemblages were strongly correlated with elevated nutrient concentrations and basal C sources, whereas runoff assemblages were associated with discharge variability and median substrate size. We suggest that strong differences in abiotic variability between spring-fed and runoff rivers play an important role in determining invertebrate assemblage structure. Because spring-fed rivers exhibit more stable temperatures throughout the year and lower temperatures during the summer than runoff rivers, they may provide essential refugia for coldwater taxa in a warming climate.

show abstract

Flow and Habitat Effects on Juvenile Fish Abundance in Natural and Altered Flow Regimes

Cited by 128 publications

References 0 publications

Modelling Tools to Analyze and Assess the Ecological Impact of Hydropower Dams

Modelling Tools to Analyze and Assess the Ecological Impact of Hydropower Dams

Hydropeaking indicators for characterization of the Upper-Rhone River in Switzerland

Environment shapes invertebrate assemblage structure differences between volcanic spring-fed and runoff rivers in northern California

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About