Dataset Information

Leaky barriers: leaky enough for fish to pass?

ABSTRACT: Perceived as environmental-friendly hydraulic structures, leaky barriers used for natural flood management are introduced into rivers, potentially creating migration barriers for fish. Using sustainable, local materials to construct wooden barriers across river channels in upper catchments, these barriers aim to slow down the flow, reduce flood peaks and attenuate the flow reaching downstream communities. Yet little is known about their impact on hydrodynamics and fish passage. Here, we examined two model barrier designs under 100% and 80% bankfull flow conditions in an open channel flume. These barriers included a porous and a non-porous design, with the latter emulating the natural accumulation of brush, sediment and leaf material between logs over time. Flow visualization and velocity measurements recorded with acoustic Doppler velocimetry characterized the flow field upstream and downstream of the barriers. Our fish behavioural studies revealed that juvenile salmon (Salmo salar) movement between downstream and upstream sections of the flume was inhibited by barrier design rather than discharge, influencing upstream fish passage and their spatial preference, indicating the importance of barrier design criteria to facilitate fish movement.

SUBMITTER: Muller S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8074940 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Leaky barriers: leaky enough for fish to pass?

Müller Stephanie S Wilson Catherine A M E CAME Ouro Pablo P Cable Joanne J

Royal Society open science 20210303 3

Perceived as environmental-friendly hydraulic structures, leaky barriers used for natural flood management are introduced into rivers, potentially creating migration barriers for fish. Using sustainable, local materials to construct wooden barriers across river channels in upper catchments, these barriers aim to slow down the flow, reduce flood peaks and attenuate the flow reaching downstream communities. Yet little is known about their impact on hydrodynamics and fish passage. Here, we examined ...[more]

PMID: 33959345

Similar Datasets

Project description:AbstractThe ability to perceive and recognise a reflected mirror image as self (mirror self-recognition, MSR) is considered a hallmark of cognition across species. Although MSR has been reported in mammals and birds, it is not known to occur in any other major taxon. Potentially limiting our ability to test for MSR in other taxa is that the established assay, the mark test, requires that animals display contingency testing and self-directed behaviour. These behaviours may be difficult for humans to interpret in taxonomically divergent animals, especially those that lack the dexterity (or limbs) required to touch a mark. Here, we show that a fish, the cleaner wrasse Labroides dimidiatus, shows behaviour that may reasonably be interpreted as passing through all phases of the mark test: (i) social reactions towards the reflection, (ii) repeated idiosyncratic behaviours towards the mirror, and (iii) frequent observation of their reflection. When subsequently provided with a coloured tag in a modified mark test, fish attempt to remove the mark by scraping their body in the presence of a mirror but show no response towards transparent marks or to coloured marks in the absence of a mirror. This remarkable finding presents a challenge to our interpretation of the mark test—do we accept that these behavioural responses, which are taken as evidence of self-recognition in other species during the mark test, lead to the conclusion that fish are self-aware? Or do we rather decide that these behavioural patterns have a basis in a cognitive process other than self-recognition and that fish do not pass the mark test? If the former, what does this mean for our understanding of animal intelligence? If the latter, what does this mean for our application and interpretation of the mark test as a metric for animal cognitive abilities?Editor’s noteThis Short Report received both positive and negative reviews by experts. The Academic Editor has written an accompanying Primer that we are publishing alongside this article (https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.3000112). The linked Primer presents a complementary expert perspective; it discusses how the current study should be interpreted in the context of evidence for and against self-awareness in a wide range of animals.

Dataset Information

Leaky barriers: leaky enough for fish to pass?

Publications

Leaky barriers: leaky enough for fish to pass?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets