2020
DOI: 10.1139/cjfas-2019-0243
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Understanding gas bubble trauma in an era of hydropower expansion: how do fish compensate at depth?

Abstract: Hydrostatic pressure is known to protect fish from damage by total dissolved gas (TDG) supersaturation, but empirical relationships are lacking. In this study we demonstrate the relationship between depth, TDG, and gas bubble trauma (GBT). Hydroelectric dams generate TDG supersaturation that causes bubble growth in the tissues of aquatic animals, resulting in sublethal and lethal effects. We exposed fish to 100%, 115%, 120%, and 130% TDG at 16 and 63 cm of depth and recorded time to 50% loss of equilibrium and… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
60
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(61 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
60
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Decreased survival in hypoxic treatments of the current study could have occurred since embryos' oxygen supply depends on oxygen diffusion pressure, and the rate of flow [56]. Moreover, decreased survival in hyperoxic treatments could be related to oxidant-related damage and/or minor gas bubble trauma [57,58].…”
Section: Critical Windows For Survivalmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…Decreased survival in hypoxic treatments of the current study could have occurred since embryos' oxygen supply depends on oxygen diffusion pressure, and the rate of flow [56]. Moreover, decreased survival in hyperoxic treatments could be related to oxidant-related damage and/or minor gas bubble trauma [57,58].…”
Section: Critical Windows For Survivalmentioning
confidence: 78%
“…This is misleading, however, because there is evidence that fish that die of GBT generally have bubbles in the gills (e.g. Antcliffe et al., 2002; Bentley, Dawley, & Newcomb, 1976; Pleizier et al., 2020). It should also be noted that sampling intervals varied greatly in both the time to bubbles in the gills dataset (mean 15.8h ± 6 SE) and the mortality dataset (e.g.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…0.3-0.9 m depth) of the cages in the Lake Evangervatnet. When compensating for pressure (Pleizier et al, 2020), an average TDG of 110.2 and 108.3% in the surface water provides compensation to ca 107 and 105% TDG at 0.3 m water depth and 105 and 103% TDG at 0.9 m depth at the bottom of the cages. In the Lake Evangervatnet, an average TDG of 107.2% did not cause mortality.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For example, radio tagged rainbow trout, cutthroat trout (O. clarkii Richardson, 1836), brown trout (Salmo trutta Linnaeus, 1758) and bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus Suckley, 1859) occupy median depths from 1.3 to 2 m in a river with 101% to 135% TDG (Weitkamp & Sullivan, 2003). The depth preference for fish is important because hydrostatic pressure protects fish from GBD by ca 10% per meter depth (Pleizier et al, 2020). Fish can compensate by swimming deeper, thereby reducing harmful effects from TDG compared to fish confined to shallow water (Ebel, 1969;Weitkamp, 1976;Heggberget, 1984;Cao et al, 2019;Pleizier et al, 2020).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation