Physical modelling of water, fauna and flora: knowledge gaps, avenues for future research and infrastructural needs

Abstract

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLETaylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the "Content") contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor Environment and Sustainability, Via Enrico Fermi 2749, I-21027-Ispra, Italy ABSTRACT Physical modelling is a key tool for generating understanding of the complex interactions between aquatic organisms and hydraulics, which is important for management of aquatic environments under environmental change and our ability to exploit ecosystem services. Many aspects of this field remain poorly understood and the use of physical models within eco-hydraulics requires advancement in methodological application and substantive understanding. This paper presents a review of the emergent themes from a workshop tasked with identifying the future infrastructure requirements of the next generation of eco-hydraulics researchers. The identified themes are: abiotic factors, adaptation, complexity and feedback, variation, and scale and scaling. The paper examines these themes and identifies how progress on each of them is key to existing and future efforts to progress our knowledge of eco-hydraulic interactions. Examples are drawn from studies on biofilms, plants, and sessile and mobile fauna in shallow water fluvial and marine environments. Examples of research gaps and directions for educational, infrastructural and technological advance are also presented.

Physical modelling of the combined effect of vegetation and wood on river morphology

“…living) elements in physical models is challenging, not only because the experimental set-up has to support vegetation growth and survival, but more crucially because it poses scaling problems (Thomas et al, 2014). However, if the experiments are used to investigate processes rather than to reproduce field prototypes, fast growing plant species such as alfalfa (Medicago sativa) provide the possibility of exploring a range of influences of above-ground and below-ground vegetation biomass on river processes and morphology (Clarke, 2014).…”

Management of vegetation encroachment by natural and induced channel avulsions: A physical model

“…Physical modelling of the hydraulic, morphological, and vegetation interactions is a challenging task and poses many unresolved questions about scaling of vegetation, as well as the potential to correctly reproduce all the relevant physical and biological processes (Thomas et al, ). However, many previous studies (e.g., Bertoldi et al, ; Tal & Paola, ; van Dijk, Teske, van de Lagenweg, & Kleinhans, ) indicate the relevance of laboratory experiments to investigate specific process in a controlled environment.…”

Quantifying biostabilisation effects of biofilm-secreted and extracted extracellular polymeric substances (EPSs) on sandy substrate

“…Physical modelling of the complex flow, sediment transport and ecological interactions within aquatic ecosystems is key to bridge the divide between field observations and numerical models (Thomas et al, 2014;Gerbersdorf and Wieprecht, 2015). The implementation of biological processes into sediment transport equations that have traditionally been modelled as abiotic systems is expected to result in better predictions of sediment dynamics (Black et al, 2002;Righetti and Lucarelli, 2007;Gerbersdorf et al, 2011;Parsons et al, 2016).…”