Osmoregulatory, metabolic, and nutritional condition of summer-run male Chinook salmon in relation to their fate and migratory behavior in a regulated river

Hasler, Caleb T.; Donaldson, Michael R.; Sunder, Rana P. B.; Guimond, Esther; Patterson, David A.; Mossop, Brent; Hinch, Scott G.; Cooke, Steven J.

doi:10.3354/esr00343

Cited by 15 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 56 publications

(46 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Diadromous fish require migration corridors that extend from sea to river (e.g. Hasler et al 2011, Jepsen et al 2012, Mateus et al 2012, Walter et al 2012, all this Theme Section). In addition, even small-bodied, pelagic fishes may need at least 100 to 300 river km to sustain populations (Perkin & Gido 2011).…”

Section: Lack Of Appreciation For the Various Scales On Which River Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Endangered river fish: factors hindering conservation and restoration

Cooke¹,

Paukert²,

Hogan³

2012

Endang. Species. Res.

Self Cite

162

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Globally, riverine fish face many anthropogenic threats including riparian and flood plain habitat degradation, altered hydrology, migration barriers, fisheries exploitation, environmental (climate) change, and introduction of invasive species. Collectively, these threats have made riverine fishes some of the most threatened taxa on the planet. Although much effort has been devoted to identifying the threats faced by river fish, there has been less effort devoted to identifying the factors that may hinder our ability to conserve and restore river fish populations and their watersheds. Therefore, we focus our efforts on identifying and discussing 10 general factors (can also be viewed as research and implementation needs) that constrain or hinder effective conservation action for endangered river fish: (1) limited basic natural history information; (2) limited appreciation for the scale/extent of migrations and the level of connectivity needed to sustain populations; (3) limited understanding of fish/river-flow relationships; (4) limited understanding of the seasonal aspects of river fish biology, particularly during winter and/or wet seasons; (5) challenges in predicting the response of river fish and river ecosystems to both environmental change and various restoration or management actions; (6) limited understanding of the ecosystem services provided by river fish; (7) the inherent difficulty in studying river fish; (8) limited understanding of the human dimension of river fish conservation and management; (9) limitations of single species approaches that often fail to address the broader-scale problems; and (10) limited effectiveness of governance structures that address endangered river fish populations and rivers that cross multiple jurisdictions. We suggest that these issues may need to be addressed to help protect, restore, or conserve river fish globally, particularly those that are endangered.

show abstract

Section: Lack Of Appreciation For the Various Scales On Which River Fmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Riverine fish spawning may be linked to increased spring flows (e.g. Paukert & Fisher 2001, Winemiller 2005, Hasler et al 2011), but low flows may be important to other species (e.g. Humphries et al 1999).…”

Section: Limited Understanding Of Fish-flow Relationshipsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endangered river fish: factors hindering conservation and restoration

Cooke¹,

Paukert²,

Hogan³

2012

Endang. Species. Res.

Self Cite

162

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…2004; Zigler et al. 2004; Hasler et al. 2011), higher energetic expenditures during migration (Tiffan et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even well‐designed facilities will vary in their effectiveness depending on inter‐individual differences in swimming behaviour (Hinch and Bratty 2000; Castro‐Santos 2005) and physiological condition of the fish (Pon et al. 2009; Hasler et al. 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A quantitative assessment of fish passage efficiency

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In an attempt to restore the connectivity of fragmented river habitats, a variety of passage facilities have been installed at river barriers. Despite the cost of building these structures, there has been no quantitative evaluation of their overall success at restoring fish passage. We reviewed articles from 1960 to 2011, extracted data from 65 papers on fish passage efficiency, size and species of fish, and fishway characteristics to determine the best predictors of fishway efficiency. Because data were scarce for fishes other than salmonids (order Salmoniformes), we combined data for all non‐salmonids for our analysis. On average, downstream passage efficiency was 68.5%, slightly higher than upstream passage efficiency of 41.7%, and neither differed across the geographical regions of study. Salmonids were more successful than non‐salmonids in passing upstream (61.7 vs. 21.1%) and downstream (74.6 vs. 39.6%) through fish passage facilities. Passage efficiency differed significantly between types of fishways; pool and weir, pool and slot and natural fishways had the highest efficiencies, whereas Denil and fish locks/elevators had the lowest. Upstream passage efficiency decreased significantly with fishway slope, but increased with fishway length, and water velocity. An information‐theoretic analysis indicated that the best predictors of fish passage efficiency were order of fish (i.e. salmonids > non‐salmonids), type of fishway and length of fishway. Overall, the low efficiency of passage facilities indicated that most need to be improved to sufficiently mitigate habitat fragmentation for the complete fish community across a range of environmental conditions.

show abstract

“…Pool-type fishways, which include pool and weir and vertical slot, are the most efficient conventional or technical fishway types constructed, either for salmonids or for non-salmonids [4]. Only fishways with optimal design can be of high efficiency as their success varies according to swimming ability, size [13]–[15] and physiologic state [16], [17] of different fish species, as well as hydraulics [18] and turbulence [19]. The design criteria for pool-type fishways are quite well understood for diadromous species [9], [11], [18].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pool-Type Fishways: Two Different Morpho-Ecological Cyprinid Species Facing Plunging and Streaming Flows

Branco

Santos

Katopodis³

et al. 2013

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Fish are particularly sensitive to connectivity loss as their ability to reach spawning grounds is seriously affected. The most common way to circumvent a barrier to longitudinal connectivity, and to mitigate its impacts, is to implement a fish passage device. However, these structures are often non-effective for species with different morphological and ecological characteristics so there is a need to determine optimum dimensioning values and hydraulic parameters. The aim of this work is to study the behaviour and performance of two species with different ecological characteristics (Iberian barbel Luciobarbus bocagei–bottom oriented, and Iberian chub Squalius pyrenaicus–water column) in a full-scale experimental pool-type fishway that offers two different flow regimes–plunging and streaming. Results showed that both species passed through the surface notch more readily during streaming flow than during plunging flow. The surface oriented species used the surface notch more readily in streaming flow, and both species were more successful in moving upstream in streaming flow than in plunging flow. Streaming flow enhances upstream movement of both species, and seems the most suitable for fishways in river systems where a wide range of fish morpho-ecological traits are found.

show abstract

Osmoregulatory, metabolic, and nutritional condition of summer-run male Chinook salmon in relation to their fate and migratory behavior in a regulated river

Cited by 15 publications

References 56 publications

Endangered river fish: factors hindering conservation and restoration

Endangered river fish: factors hindering conservation and restoration

A quantitative assessment of fish passage efficiency

Pool-Type Fishways: Two Different Morpho-Ecological Cyprinid Species Facing Plunging and Streaming Flows

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About