Turbulence and energetics of fish nest and pool structures in agricultural canal

Article

Abstract

Flow turbulence and fish energy expenditure were investigated in an artificial fish nest and fish pool introduced as resting habitats to an agricultural drainage canal in Japan. Instantaneous current velocity, water depth at various points, and water temperature in the canal were observed eight times during 2013–2015. Using the data, turbulence descriptors such as turbulent kinetic energy, degree of turbulence, and Reynolds shear stresses, as well as fish energy expenditure, were estimated at 15 monitoring sites. By categorizing these sites into three groups (fish nest, pool, and control), the hydraulic and energetic features of fish nests and pools were quantitatively analyzed. It was estimated that goby (Tridentiger brevispinis) expended significantly less energy in the fish nest and, to a lesser extent, pool than in the control environment, indicating that the two artificial refuges contributed to creating an energetically preferable fish habitat in the canal. The turbulence descriptors estimated in this study could provide realistic inputs to laboratory experiments on fish locomotion and lead to help improve the design of eco-friendly physical structures in agricultural canals.

Keywords

Fish nest Turbulence Habitat Canal Agriculture Hydraulics 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was financially supported in part by the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science KAKENHI (Grant Numbers 25450353 and 16K07935). Miho town office, Ibaraki Prefecture, provided maps of the canals in the study area. The authors thank Mutumi Iida, Hibiki Tanigawa, Yasufumi Kawamata, Shu Ishizaki, Shoko Okano, and Junko Nishiwaki for their support in the fieldwork and laboratory experiments.

References

  1. Asaeda T, Vu TK, Manatunge J (2005) Effects of flow velocity on feeding behavior and microhabitat selection of the stone moroko Pseudorasbora parva: a trade-off between feeding and swimming costs. Trans Am Fish Soc 134:537–547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Azuma A (1993) Hydrodynamics. Asakura, Tokyo, pp 74–77 (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  3. Cotel AJ, Webb PW, Tritico H (2006) Do brown trout choose locations with reduced turbulence? Trans Am Fish Soc 135:610–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Davidson PA (2015) Turbulence—an introduction for scientists and engineers. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 57–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Edosaki Land Improvement Office and Meiwa Gijyutsu Consultant (2003) Report on business consignment for designing irrigation and drainage project in Okitsu district, pp 5-1–5-27 (in Japanese, unpublished) Google Scholar
  6. Enders EC, Boisclair D, Roy AG (2003) The effect of turbulence on the cost of swimming for juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Can J Fish Aquat Sci 60:1149–1160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Enders EC, Boisclair D, Roy AG (2005) A model of total swimming costs in turbulent flow for juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). Can J Fish Aquat Sci 62:1079–1089CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Enders EC, Roy ML, Ovidio M, Hallot EJ, Boyer C, Petit F, Roy AG (2009) Habitat choice by Atlantic salmon parr in relation to turbulence at a reach scale. North Am J Fish Manag 30:1819–1830CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fukuda S, De Baets B, Mouton AM, Waegeman W, Nakajima J, Mukai T, Hiramatsu K, Onikura N (2011) Effect of model formulation on the optimization of a genetic Tkagagi–Sugeno fuzzy system for fish habitat suitability evaluation. Ecol Model 222:1401–1413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fukuda S, Tanakura T, Hiramatsu K, Harada M (2015) Assessment of spatial habitat heterogeneity by coupling data-driven habitat suitability models with a 2D hydrodynamic model in small-scale streams. Ecol Inform 29:147–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hill J, Grossman GD (1993) An energetic model of microhabitat use for rainbow trout and rosyside dace. Ecology 74(3):685–698CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hiramatsu K, Nishimura S, Shimizu H, Nakane Y, Ichion E (2010) Impact of drainage canal improvement works on fish biota—a case study of Ooe drainage channel improved with eco-friendly works. Trans Jpn Soc Irrig Drain Rural Eng 270:69–78 (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  13. Horino H, Nakagiri T, Ogino Y (2008) Evaluation of effect of environment-conscious irrigation canals on fish and shellfish inhabitation and water conveyance function. Trans Jpn Soc Irrig Drain Rural Eng 254:77–83 (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  14. Kawai H, Nagayama S, Urabe H, Akasaka T, Nakamura F (2014) Combining energetic profitability and cover effects to evaluate salmonid habitat quality. Environ Biol Fishes 97:575–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kawanabe H, Mizuno N, Hosoya K (1989) Freshwater fish in Japan. Yama-kei, Tokyo, pp 606–607 (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  16. Lacey RWJ, Neary VS, Liao JC, Enders EC, Tritico HM (2011) The IPOS framework: linking fish swimming performance in altered flows from laboratory experiments to rivers. River Res Appl.  https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.1584 Google Scholar
  17. Lancaster J, Hildrew AG (1993) Characterizing in-stream flow refugia. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 50:1663–1675CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Liao JC (2007) A review of fish swimming mechanics and behaviour in altered flows. Philos Trans R Soc B 362:1973–1993.  https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2007.2082 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lupandin AI (2005) Effect of flow turbulence on swimming speed of fish. Biol Bull 32(5):461–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Maeda S (2013) A simulation-optimization method for ecohydraulic design of fish habitat in a canal. Ecol Eng 61:182–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Maertens AP, Triantafyllou MS, Yue DKP (2015) Efficiency of fish propulsion. Bioinspir Biomim 10(4):046013CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Moore KMS, Gregory SV (1988) Response of young-of-the-year cutthroat trout to manipulation of habitat structure in a small stream. Trans Am Fish Soc 117:162–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Morgan RP II, Ulanowicz RE, Rasin VJ Jr, Noe LA, Gray GB (1976) Effects of shear on eggs and larvae of striped bass, Morone saxatilis, and white perch, M. americana. Trans Am Fish Soc 105(1):149–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mori A (2007) Deterioration of paddy field ecosystems. In: Mizutani M (ed) An introduction to paddy field eco-engineering for sustaining and restoring biodiversity in rural areas. Rural Culture Association Japan, Tokyo, pp 25–28 (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  25. Muraoka K, Nakanishi S, Kayaba Y (2017) Boulder arrangement on a rocky ramp fishway based on the swimming behavior of fish. Limnologica 62:188–193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Nakamura R, Sekine M, Hashiguchi M, Higuchi R, Imai G (2008) Experimental investigation of fish conservation effect of ecological revetment blocks. Environ Eng Res 45:507–514 (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  27. Odeh M, Noreika JF, Haro A, Maynard A, Castro-Santos T, Cada GF (2002) Evaluation of the effects of turbulence on the behavior of migratory fish. Final Report 2002, Report to Bonneville Power Administration, Contract No. 00000022, Project No. 200005700 (BPA Report DOE/BP-00000022-1)Google Scholar
  28. Onitsuka K, Akiyama J, Mori Y, Seki T (2009) Relationship between flow characteristics in orientation area of fish and fish behavior. Proc Hydraul Eng 53:1225–1230 (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  29. Pavlov DS, Skorobogatov MA (2009) Effect of the flow turbulence on the movement pattern of the caudal fin in fish. Dokl Biol Sci 428:464–466CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Pavlov DS, Lupandin AI, Skorobogatov MA (2000) The effects of flow turbulence on the behavior and distribution of fish. J Ichthyol 40(2):S232–S261Google Scholar
  31. Pretty JL, Harrison SSC, Shepherd DJ, Smith C, Hildrew AG, Hey RD (2003) River rehabilitation and fish populations: assessing the benefit of instream structures. J Appl Ecol 40:251–265CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Santos JM, Silva A, Katopodis C, Pinheiro P, Pinheiro A, Bochechas J, Ferreira MT (2012) Ecohydraulics of pool-type fishways: getting past the barriers. Ecol Eng 48:38–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Santos JM, Branco P, Katopodis C, Ferreira T, Pinheiro A (2014) Retrofitting pool-and-weir fishways to improve passage performance of benthic fishes: effect of boulder density and fishway discharge. Ecol Eng 73:335–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Silva AT, Santos JM, Ferreira MT, Pinheiro AN, Katopodis C (2011) Effects of water velocity and turbulence on the behaviour of Iberian barbell (Luciobarbus bocagei, Steindachner 1864) in an experimental pool-type fishway. River Res Appl 27:360–373CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Silva AT, Katopodis C, Santos JM, Ferreira MT, Pinheiro AN (2012) Cyprinid swimming behaviour in response to turbulent flow. Ecol Eng 44:314–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Silva AT, Hatry C, Thiem JD, Gutowsky LFG, Hatin D, Zhu DZ, Dawson JW, Katopodis C, Cooke SJ (2015a) Behaviour and locomotor activity of a migratory catostomid during fishway passage. PLoS ONE 10(4):e0123051.  https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0123051 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  37. Silva AT, Katopodis C, Tachie MF, Santos JM, Ferreira MT (2015b) Downstream swimming behaviour of catadromous and potamodromous fish over spillways. River Res Appl.  https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.2904 Google Scholar
  38. Smith DL, Brannon EL, Odeh M (2005) Response of juvenile rainbow trout to turbulence produced by prismatoidal shapes. Trans Am Fish Soc 134:741–753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tharme RE (2003) A global perspective on environmental flow assessment: emerging trends in the development and application of environmental flow methodologies for rivers. River Res Appl 19:397–441CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Tritico HM, Cotel AJ (2010) The effects of turbulent eddies on the stability and critical swimming speed of creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus). J Exp Biol 213:2284–2293CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Wilkes MA, Maddock I, Visser F, Acreman MC (2013) Incorporating hydrodynamics into ecohydraulics: the role of turbulence in the swimming performance and habitat selection of stream-dwelling fish. In: Maddock I, Harby A, Kemp P, Wood P (eds) Ecohydraulics: an integrated approach, 1st edn. Wiley, New York, pp 9–30Google Scholar
  42. Wilkes MA, Enders EC, Silva AT, Acreman M, Maddock I (2017) Position choice and swimming costs of juvenile Atlantic salmon salmo salar in turbulent flow. J Ecohydraul 2(1):16–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Yamamoto S, Katayama K (1986) Efficacy of the cemented block modified to protect aquatic animals in the river of Okayama Prefecture. Freshw Fish 12:31–37 (in Japanese) Google Scholar
  44. Yi Y, Wang Z, Yang Z (2010) Two-dimensional habitat modeling of Chinese sturgeon spawning sites. Ecol Model 221:864–875CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The International Society of Paddy and Water Environment Engineering and Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.College of AgricultureIbaraki UniversityInashikiJapan

Personalised recommendations