Advertisement

Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries

, Volume 28, Issue 1, pp 117–135 | Cite as

Fish passage design for sustainable hydropower in the temperate Southern Hemisphere: an evidence review

  • Martin A. Wilkes
  • Morwenna Mckenzie
  • J. Angus Webb
Reviews

Abstract

The development of hydropower and other infrastructure that disrupts river connectivity poses a serious threat to highly endemic and genetically distinct freshwater fish species in temperate parts of the Southern Hemisphere. Such locations have been neglected in previous reviews on fish passage. Fishways have long been constructed to mitigate the impacts of riverine barriers on fish, yet they have often failed for all but the largest, strongest swimming taxa. This is a particular problem in the temperate south, which is home to native species that are non-recreational and generally small-bodied with weak swimming abilities (e.g. Galaxiidae) relative to typical target species for fishway design (e.g. Salmonidae). Using the Eco Evidence method for rapid evidence synthesis, we undertook an assessment of evidence for effective fishway design focusing on species representative of the temperate south, including eel and lamprey. Systematic literature searches resulted in 630 publications. Through a rigorous screening process these were reduced to 46 publications containing 76 evidence items across 19 hypotheses relating to design criteria for upstream and downstream passage. We found an overwhelming lack of evidence for effective fishway design in the temperate south. Particular deficiencies were found with regard to the design of effective facilities for downstream passage. The attraction and entrance of upstream migrating fish into fishways is also relatively under-researched. Given the urgent need for effective fishways in the temperate south, these results justify an approach to fishway design based on a combination of empirical data and expert knowledge. In the meantime, significant resources should be assigned to improve the evidence base through high quality research. The particular deficiencies identified here could guide that research agenda.

Keywords

Fish passage Fishway design Hydropower Non-recreational fish Southern Hemisphere 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the European Commission through the Marie Sklodowska-Curie action, ‘Knowledge Exchange for Efficient Passage of Fish in the Southern Hemisphere’ (RISE-2015-690857-KEEPFISH). We would like to thank Justin O’Connor and Frank Amstaetter of the Arthur Rylah Institute, Lee Baumgartner of Charles Sturt University, Martin Mallen-Cooper of Fishway Consulting Services, Paul Franklin and Cindy Baker of the National Institute for Water and Atmospheric Research (NIWA) and Oscar Link and Evelyn Habit of the University of Concepción for their valuable inputs in terms of evidence to be included in the review.

Supplementary material

11160_2017_9496_MOESM1_ESM.docx (14 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 14 kb)
11160_2017_9496_MOESM2_ESM.xlsx (83 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (XLSX 83 kb)
11160_2017_9496_MOESM3_ESM.xlsx (108 kb)
Supplementary material 3 (XLSX 108 kb)

References

  1. Agostinho CS, Pelicice FM, Marques EE, Soares AB, de Almeida DAA (2011) All that goes up must come down? Absence of downstream passage through a fish ladder in a large Amazonian river. Hydrobiol 675(1):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Amtstaetter F, O’Connor J, Borg D, Stuart I, Moloney P, Campbell-Beshorner R (2015) Improving the passage of migrating Galaxias through a culvert. Arthur Rylah Institute for Environmental Research Unpublished Client Report for Melbourne Water, Department of Environment, Land, Water and Planning, Heidelberg, VictoriaGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker CF (2003) Effect of fall height and notch shape on the passage of inanga (Galaxias maculatus) and common bullies (Gobiomorphus cotidianus) over an experimental weir. N Z J Mar Freshw Res 37(2):283–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baker CF (2014) Effect of ramp length and slope on the efficacy of a baffled fish pass. J Fish Biol 84(2):491–502PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baker C, Aldridge B (2010) Huntly Power Station—2010 Fisheries Monitoring Report. NIWA Client Report HAM2010-109 September 2010Google Scholar
  6. Baker CF, Boubée JAT (2006) Upstream passage of inanga Galaxias maculatus and redfin bullies Gobiomorphus huttoni over artificial ramps. J Fish Biol 69(3):668–681CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Baki ABM, Zhu DZ, Rajaratnam N (2014a) Mean flow characteristics in a rock-ramp-type fish pass. J Hydraul 140(2):156–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Baki ABM, Zhu DZ, Rajaratnam N (2014b) Turbulence characteristics in a rock-ramp-type fish pass. J Hydraul 141(2):04014075CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bark A, Williams B, Knights B (2007) Current status and temporal trends in stocks of European eel in England and Wales. ICES J Mar Sci 64:1368–1378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Barletta M, Jaureguizar AJ, Baigun C, Fontoura NF, Agostinho AA, Almeida-Val VMF et al (2010) Fish and aquatic habitat conservation in South America: a continental overview with emphasis on neotropical systems. J Fish Biol 76:2118–2176PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Baumgartner LJ, Marsden T, Singhanouvong D, Phonekhampheng O, Stuart IG, Thorncraft G (2012) Using an experimental in situ fishway to provide key design criteria for lateral fish passage in tropical rivers: a case study from the Mekong River, central Lao PDR. River Res Appl 28(8):1217–1229CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Baumgartner L, Zampatti B, Jones M, Stuart I, Mallen-Cooper M (2014) Fish passage in the Murray-Darling Basin, Australia: not just an upstream battle. Ecol Restor Manag 15(S1):28–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bouska WW, Paukert CP (2010) Road crossing designs and their impact on fish assemblages of Great Plains streams. Trans Am Fish Soc 139(1):214–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Branco P, Santos JM, Katopodis C, Pinheiro A, Ferreira MT (2013a) Effect of flow regime hydraulics on passage performance of Iberian chub (Squalius pyrenaicus) (Günther, 1868) in an experimental pool-and-weir fishway. Hydrobiol 714(1):145–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Branco P, Santos JM, Katopodis C, Pinheiro A, Ferreira MT (2013b) Pool-type fishways: two different morpho-ecological cyprinid species facing plunging and streaming flows. PLoS ONE 8(5):e65089PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Bretón F, Baki ABM, Link O, Zhu DZ, Rajaratnam N (2013) Flow in nature-like fishway and its relation to fish behaviour. Can J Civ Eng 40(6):567–573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Brown RS, Colotelo AH, Pflugrath BD, Boys CA, Baumgartner LJ, Deng ZD, Silva LGM et al (2014) Understanding barotrauma in fish passing hydro structures: a global strategy for sustainable development of water resources. Fisheries 39(3):108–122CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Bunt CM, Castro-Santos T, Haro A (2012) Performance of fish passage structures at upstream barriers to migration. River Res Appl 28(4):457–478CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Bunt CM, Castro-Santos T, Haro A (2016) Reinforcement and validation of the analyses and conclusions related to fishway evaluation data from Bunt et al.: ‘performance of fish passage structures at upstream barriers to migration’. River Res Appl. doi: 10.1002/rra.3095 Google Scholar
  20. Buysse D, Mouton AM, Stevens M, den Neucker T, Coeck J (2013) Mortality of European eel after downstream migration through two types of pumping stations. Fish Manag Ecol 21(1):13–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Buysse D, Mouton AM, Baeyens R, Stevens M, den Neucker T, Coeck J (2015) Evaluation of downstream migration mitigation actions for eel at an Archimedes screw pump pumping station. Fish Manag Ecol 22(4):286–294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Calles O, Karlsson S, Hebrand M, Comoglio C (2012) Evaluating technical improvements for downstream migrating diadromous fish at a hydroelectric plant. Ecol Eng 48:30–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. CEBC (2010) Guidelines for systematic review in environmental management. Centre for Evidence-Based Conservation and Collaboration for Environmental Evidence, BangorGoogle Scholar
  24. Chapman A, Morgan DL, Beatty SJ, Gill HS (2006) Variation in life history of land-locked lacustrine and riverine populations of Galaxias maculatus (Jenyns 1842) in Western Australia. Environ Biol Fishes 77(1):21–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Clay CH (1995) Design of Fishways and other Fish Facilities. Lewis, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  26. Colotelo AH, Pflugrath BD, Brown RS, Brauner CJ, Mueller RP, Carlson TJ, Trumbo BA et al (2012) The effect of rapid and sustained decompression on barotrauma in juvenile brook lamprey and Pacific lamprey: implications for passage at hydroelectric facilities. Fish Res 129:17–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Cooke SJ, Hinch SG (2013) Improving the reliability of fishway attraction and passage efficiency estimates to inform fishway engineering, science and practice. Ecol Eng 58:123–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Cooney PB, Kwak TJ (2013) Spatial extent and dynamics of dam impacts on tropical island freshwater fish assemblages. Bioscience 63(3):176–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Coutant CC, Whitney RR (2000) Fish behavior in relation to passage through hydropower turbines: a review. Trans Am Fish Soc 129(2):351–380CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. da Silva LGMD, Nogueira LB, Maia BP, Resende LBD (2012) Fish passage post-construction issues: analysis of distribution, attraction and passage efficiency metrics at the Baguari Dam fish ladder to approach the problem. Neotrop Ichthyol 10(4):751–762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Dauble DD, Geist DR (2000) Comparison of mainstem spawning habitats for two populations of fall Chinook salmon in the Columbia River Basin. Regul Rivers 16(4):345–361CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. David BO, Hamer MP (2012) Remediation of a perched stream culvert with ropes improves fish passage. Mar Freshw Res 63(5):440–449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. David BO, Tonkin JD, Taipeti KW, Hokianga HT (2014) Learning the ropes: mussel spat ropes improve fish and shrimp passage through culverts. J Appl Ecol 51(1):214–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Dekker W (2003) Did lack of spawners cause the collapse of the European eel, Anguilla anguilla? Fish Manag Ecol 10:365–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Deng Z, Carlson TJ, Dauble DD, Ploskey GR (2011) Fish passage assessment of an advanced hydropower turbine and conventional turbine using blade-strike modeling. Energies 4(1):57–67CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Dixon D, Hogan T (2015) Alden fish-friendly hydropower turbine: history and development status. In: International conference on engineering and ecohydrology for fish passage, Groningen, June 2015Google Scholar
  37. Doehring K, Young RG, McIntosh AR (2011) Factors affecting juvenile galaxiid fish passage at culverts. Mar Freshw Res 62(1):38–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Doehring K, Young RG, McIntosh AR (2012) Facilitation of upstream passage for juveniles of a weakly swimming migratory galaxiid. N Z J Mar Freshw Res 46(3):303–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Duarte BADF, Ramos ICR (2012) Reynolds shear-stress and velocity: positive biological response of neotropical fishes to hydraulic parameters in a vertical slot fishway. Neotrop Ichthyol 10(4):813–819CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Durif C, Elie P, Gosset C, Rives J, Travade F (2002) Behavioral study of downstream migrating eels by radio-telemetry at a small hydroelectric power plant. In: Dixon DA (ed) Biology, management and protection of catadromous eels. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, pp 343–356Google Scholar
  41. East AE, Pess GR, Bountry JA, Magirl CS, Ritchie AC, Logan JB, Randle TJ et al (2015) Large-scale dam removal on the Elwha River, Washington, USA: river channel and floodplain geomorphic change. Geomorphology 228:765–786CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Enders EC, Gessel MH, Williams JG (2009) Development of successful fish passage structures for downstream migrants requires knowledge of their behavioural response to accelerating flow. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 66(12):2109–2117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Enders EC, Gessel MH, Anderson JJ, Williams JG (2012) Effects of decelerating and accelerating flows on juvenile salmonid behavior. Trans Am Fish Soc 141(2):357–364CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. EWRI-ACS (2009) Joint EWRI-AFS Fish Passage Reference Database (online). http://scholarworks.umass.edu/fishpassage_database/. Accessed 4 Oct 2016
  45. Feurich R, Boubée J, Olsen NRB (2012) Improvement of fish passage in culverts using CFD. Ecol Eng 47:1–8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ficke AD, Myrick CA, Jud N (2011) The swimming and jumping ability of three small Great Plains fishes: implications for fishway design. Trans Am Fish Soc 140(6):1521–1531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Foulds WL, Lucas MC (2013) Extreme inefficiency of two conventional, technical fishways used by European river lamprey (Lampetra fluviatilis). Ecol Eng 58:423–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Frimpong EA, Angermeier PL (2009) Fish traits: a database of ecological and life-history traits of freshwater fishes of the United States. Fisheries 34(10):487–495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Froese R, Pauly D (eds) (2016) FishBase. www.fishbase.org
  50. Gehrke PC, Harris JH (2000) Large-scale patterns in species richness and composition of temperate riverine fish communities, south-eastern Australia. Mar Freshw Res 51(2):165–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Godinho AL, Kynard B (2009) Migratory fishes of Brazil: life history and fish passage needs. River Res Appl 25(6):702–712CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Goodman JM, Dunn NR, Ravenscroft PJ, Allibone RM, Boubee JA, David BO, Rolfe JR et al (2014) Conservation status of New Zealand freshwater fish, 2013. N Z Threat Classif Ser 7:12Google Scholar
  53. Gosset C, Travade F, Durif C, Rives J, Elie P (2005) Tests of two types of bypass for downstream migration of eels at a small hydroelectric power plant. River Res Appl 21(10):1095–1105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Greenhalgh T, Peacock R (2005) Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: audit of primary sources. BMJ 331:1064–1065PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Habit E, Piedra P, Ruzzante DE, Walde SJ, Belk MC, Cussac VE, Colin N et al (2010) Changes in the distribution of native fishes in response to introduced species and other anthropogenic effects. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 19(5):697–710Google Scholar
  56. Haro A, Odeh M, Noreika J, Castro-Santos T (1998) Effect of water acceleration on downstream migratory behavior and passage of Atlantic salmon smolts and juvenile American shad at surface bypasses. Trans Am Fish Soc 127(1):118–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Haro A, Castro-Santos T, Boubée J (2000) Behaviour and passage of silver-phase eels, Anguilla rostrata (LeSueur), at a small hydroelectric facility. Dana 12:33–42Google Scholar
  58. Hicks B, Roper M, Ito T, Campbell D (2008) Passage of inanga (Galaxias maculatus) over artificial ramps as a means to restoring upstream access to stream habitat. Centre for Biological and Ecological Research Contract Report 89Google Scholar
  59. Hogan TW, Cada GF, Amaral SV (2014) The status of environmentally enhance hydropower turbines. Fisheries 39(4):164–172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Holthe E, Lund E, Finstad B, Thorstad EB, McKinley RS (2005) A fish selective obstacle to prevent dispersion of an unwanted fish species, based on leaping capabilities. Fish Manag Ecol 12(2):143–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Johnson NS, Miehls S (2013) Guiding out-migrating juvenile sea lamprey (Petromyzon marinus) with pulsed direct current. River Res Appl 30(9):1146–1156CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Johnson EL, Caudill CC, Keefer ML, Clabough TS, Peery CA, Jepson MA, Moser ML (2012) Movement of radio-tagged adult Pacific lampreys during a large-scale fishway velocity experiment. Trans Am Fish Soc 141(3):571–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Katopodis C (2005) Developing a toolkit for fish passage, ecological flow management and fish habitat works. J Hydraul Res 43(5):451–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Katopodis C, Williams JG (2012) The development of fish passage research in a historical context. Ecol Eng 48:8–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Keefer ML, Peery CA, Lee SR, Daigle WR, Johnson EL, Moser ML (2011) Behaviour of adult Pacific lamprey in near-field flow and fishway design experiments. Fish Manag Ecol 18(3):177–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Kemp PS, O’Hanley JR (2010) Procedures for evaluating and prioritising the removal of fish passage barriers: a synthesis. Fish Manag Ecol 17(4):297–322Google Scholar
  67. Kemp PS, Gessel MH, Williams JG (2005) Fine-scale behavioral responses of Pacific salmonid smolts as they encounter divergence and acceleration of flow. Trans Am Fish Soc 134:390–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Kemp PS, Russon IJ, Vowles AS, Lucas MC (2011) The influence of discharge and temperature on the ability of upstream migrant adult river lamprey (Lampetra fluviatilis) to pass experimental overshot and undershot weirs. River Res Appl 27(4):488–498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. Kucukali S, Hassinger R (2016) Flow and turbulence structure in a baffle–brush fish pass. In: Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Water Management. Thomas Telford Ltd, London, pp 1–12Google Scholar
  70. Laborde A, González A, Sanhueza C, Arriagada P, Wilkes M, Habit E, Link O (2016) Hydropower development, riverine connectivity, and non-sport fish species: criteria for hydraulic design of fishways. River Res Appl. doi: 10.1002/rra.3040 Google Scholar
  71. Lacey RWJ, Neary VS, Liao JC, Enders EC, Tritico HM (2012) The IPOS framework: linking fish swimming performance in altered flows from laboratory experiments to rivers. River Res Appl 28(4):429–443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Larinier M (2008) Fish passage experience at small-scale hydro-electric power plants in France. Hydrobiol 609(1):97–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Larinier M, Marmulla G (2004) Fish passes: types, principles and geographical distribution—an overview. In: Second international symposium on the management of large rivers for fisheries, Phnom Penh, February, 2004Google Scholar
  74. Lauder GV (2015) Fish locomotion: recent advances and new directions. Ann Rev Mar Sci 7:521–545PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. LeMoine MT, Bodensteiner LR (2014) Barriers to upstream passage by two migratory sculpins, prickly sculpin (Cottus asper) and coastrange sculpin (Cottus aleuticus), in northern Puget Sound lowland streams. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 71(11):1758–1765CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, Clarke M et al (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Ann Intern Med 151(4):W-65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Link O, Habit E (2015) Requirements and boundary conditions for fish passes of non-recreational fish species based on Chilean experiences. Rev Environ Sci Biol 2015:1–13Google Scholar
  78. Lucas MC, Bubb DH, Jang MH, Ha K, Masters JEG (2009) Availability of and access to critical habitats in regulated rivers: effects of low-head barriers on threatened lampreys. Freshw Biol 54:621–634CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. MacDonald JI, Davies PE (2007) Improving the upstream passage of two galaxiid fish species through a pipe culvert. Fish Manag Ecol 14(3):221–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Makrakis S, Miranda LE, Gomes LC, Makrakis MC, Junior HMF (2011) Ascent of neotropical migratory fish in the Itaipu reservoir fish pass. River Res Appl 27(4):511–519CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Mallen-Cooper M, Zampatti BP, Stuart IG, Baumgartner LJ (2008) Innovative fishways-manipulating turbulence in the vertical-slot design to improve performance and reduce cost. A report to the Murray Darling Basin Commission, Fishway Consulting Services, SydneyGoogle Scholar
  82. Marohn L, Prigge E, Hanel R (2014) Escapement success of silver eels from a German river system is low compared to management-based estimates. Freshw Biol 59(1):64–72CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. Masters JEG, Jang MH, Ha K, Bird PD, Frear PA, Lucas MC (2006) The commercial exploitation of a protected anadromous species, the river lamprey (Lampetra fluviatilis L.), in the tidal River Ouse, north-east England. Aquat Conserv 16:77–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Matondo BN, Dierckx A, Benitez JP, Ovidio M (2015) Does yellow eel prefer old pool and weir or new vertical slot fish pass during their upstream migration? In: International conference on engineering and ecohydrology for fish passage, Groningen, June 2015Google Scholar
  85. McDowall RM (2002) Accumulating evidence for a dispersal biogeography of southern cool temperate freshwater fishes. J Biogeogr 29(2):207–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. McDowall RM (2006) Crying wolf, crying foul, or crying shame: alien salmonids and a biodiversity crisis in the southern cool-temperate galaxioid fishes? Rev Fish Biol Fish 16(3–4):233–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. McKay SK, Schramski JR, Conyngham JN, Fischenich JC (2013) Assessing upstream fish passage connectivity with network analysis. Ecol Appl 23(6):1396–1409PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. Moser ML, Matter AL, Stuehrenberg LC, Bjornn TC (2002) Use of an extensive radio receiver network to document Pacific lamprey (Lampetra tridentata) entrance efficiency at fishways in the Lower Columbia River, USA. Aquat Telem 165:5–53Google Scholar
  89. Muñoz-Ramírez CP, Unmack PJ, Habit E, Johnson JB, Cussac VE, Victoriano P (2014) Phylogeography of the ancient catfish family Diplomystidae: biogeographic, systematic, and conservation implications. Mol Phylogenet Evol 73:146–160PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Nakagawa S, Poulin R (2012) Meta-analytic insights into Evol Ecol: an introduction and synthesis. Evol Ecol 26(5):1085–1099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Newbold LR, Karageorgopoulos P, Kemp PS (2014) Corner and sloped culvert baffles improve the upstream passage of adult European eels (Anguilla anguilla). Ecol Eng 73:752–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Noonan MJ, Grant JW, Jackson CD (2012) A quantitative assessment of fish passage efficiency. Fish Fish (Oxf) 13(4):450–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. Norris RH, Webb JA, Nichols SJ, Stewardson MJ, Harrison ET (2012) Analyzing cause and effect in environmental assessments: using weighted evidence from the literature. Freshw Sci 31:5–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Ormazabal C (1993) The conservation of biodiversity in Chile. Rev Chil Hist Nat 66(4):383–402Google Scholar
  95. Pelicice FM, Agostinho AA (2008) Fish passage facilities as ecological traps in large Neotropical rivers. Conserv Biol 22:180–188PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. Pennock CA, Bender D, Hofmeier J, Mounts JA, Waters R, Weaver VD, Gido KB (2017) Can fishways mitigate fragmentation effects on great plains fish communities? Can J Fish Aquat Sci. doi: 10.1139/cjfas-2016-0466 Google Scholar
  97. Piper AT, Wright RM, Kemp PS (2012) The influence of attraction flow on upstream passage of European eel (Anguilla anguilla) at intertidal barriers. Ecol Eng 44:329–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Piper AT, Manes C, Siniscalchi F, Marion A, Wright RM, Kemp PS (2015) Response of seaward-migrating European eel (Anguilla anguilla) to manipulated flow fields. Proc Biol Sci 282(1811):20151098PubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. Poff NL, Hart DD (2002) How Dams Vary and Why it Matters for the Emerging Science of Dam Removal: An ecological classification of dams is needed to characterize how the tremendous variation in the size, operational mode, age, and number of dams in a river basin influences the potential for restoring regulated rivers via dam removal. Bioscience 52(8):659–668CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Pompeu PDS, Horta LFM, Martinez CB (2009) Evaluation of the effects of pressure gradients on four Brazilian freshwater fish species. Braz Arch Biol Technol 52(1):111–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. Pompeu PS, Agostinho AA, Pelicice FM (2012) Existing and future challenges: the concept of successful fish passage in South America. River Res Appl 28(4):504–512CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Pompeu PS, Suzuki FM, Prado IG, Souza RCR (2015) Downstream fish passage: the new challenge of the hydropower sector for the conservation of the brazilian fish fauna. Am J Hydropower Water Environ Syst. doi: 10.14268/ajhwes.2015.00028 Google Scholar
  103. Pracheil BM, DeRolph CR, Schramm MP, Bevelhimer MS (2016a) A fish-eye view of riverine hydropower systems: the current understanding of the biological response to turbine passage. Rev Fish Biol Fish. doi: 10.1007/s11160-015-9416-8 Google Scholar
  104. Pracheil BM, McManamay RA, Bevelhimer MS, DeRolph CR, Čada GF (2016b) A traits-based approach for prioritizing species for monitoring and surrogacy selection. Endanger Species Res 31:243–258CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Pringle CM, Freeman MC, Freeman BJ (2000) Regional effects of hydrlogic alterations on riverine macrobiota in the new world: tropical-temperate comparisons. Bioscience 50(9):807–823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. Quirós R (1989) Structures assisting the migrations of non-salmonid fish: Latin America. COPESCAL Technical Paper, no. 5, United Nations, RomeGoogle Scholar
  107. Reyes-Gavilán FG, Garrido R, Nicieza AG, Toledo MM, Brana F (1996) Fish community variation along physical gradients in short streams of northern Spain and the disruptive effect of dams. Hydrobiol 321(2):155–163CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Roscoe DW, Hinch SG (2010) Effectiveness monitoring of fish passage facilities: historical trends, geographic patterns and future directions. Fish Fish (Oxf) 11(1):12–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Russon IJ, Kemp PS (2011) Experimental quantification of the swimming performance and behaviour of spawning run river lamprey Lampetra fluviatilis and European eel Anguilla anguilla. J Fish Bio 78(7):1965–1975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Ruzzante DE, Walde SJ, Cussac VE, Dalebout ML, Seibert J, Ortubay S, Habit E (2006) Phylogeography of the Percichthyidae (Pisces) in Patagonia: roles of orogeny, glaciation, and volcanism. Mol Ecol 15(10):2949–2968PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Schlosser IJ, Angermeier PL (1995) Spatial variation in demographic processes in lotic fishes: conceptual models, empirical evidence, and implications for conservation. Am Fish Soc Symp 17:360–370Google Scholar
  112. Servicio de Evaluación Ambiental (2017) Estudio de Impacto Ambiental ‘Central Hidroeléctrica del Río Chaica’ (online). http://seia.sea.gob.cl/documentos/documento.php?idDocumento=2131795393. Accessed 6 April 2017
  113. Stuart IG, Berghuis AP, Long PE, Mallen-Cooper M (2007) Do fish locks have potential in tropical rivers? River Res Appl 23(3):269–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  114. Stuart IG, Baumgartner LJ, Zampatti BP (2008a) Lock gates improve passage of small-bodied fish and crustaceans in a low gradient vertical-slot fishway. Fish Manag Ecol 15(3):241–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Stuart IG, Zampatti BP, Baumgartner LJ (2008b) Can a low-gradient vertical-slot fishway provide passage for a lowland river fish community? Mar Freshw Res 59:332–346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. Tesch FW (2003) The Eel. Blackwell, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Tummers JS, Winter E, Silva S, O’Brien P, Jang MH, Lucas MC (2015) Tricky Little Lampreys! Efficacy of an unmodified and modified super-active baffle fish pass for European river lamprey (Lampetra Fluviatilis). In: International conference on engineering and ecohydrology for fish passage, Groningen, June 2015Google Scholar
  118. Van Esch BPM, Spierts ILY (2014) Validation of a model to predict fish passage mortality in pumping stations. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 71(12):1910–1923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Vowles AS, Kemp PS (2012) Effects of light on the behaviour of brown trout (Salmo trutta) encountering accelerating flow: application to downstream fish passage. Ecol Eng 47:247–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. Vowles AS, Anderson JJ, Gessel MH, Williams JG, Kemp PS (2014) Effects of avoidance behaviour on downstream fish passage through areas of accelerating flow when light and dark. Anim Behav 92:101–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. Vowles AS, Don AM, Karageorgopoulos P, Worthington TA, Kemp PS (2015) Efficiency of a dual density studded fish pass designed to mitigate for impeded upstream passage of juvenile European eels (Anguilla anguilla) at a model Crump weir. Fish Manag Ecol 22(4):307–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. Webb JA, Wallis EM, Stewardson MJ (2012) A systematic review of published evidence linking wetland plants to water regime components. Aquat Bot 103:1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Webb JA, Miller KA, King EL, de Little S, Stewardson MJ, Zimmerman JKH, Poff NL (2013) Squeezing the most out of existing literature: a systematic re-analysis of published evidence on ecological responses to altered flows. Freshw Biol 58:2439–2451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Webb JA, Miller KA, de Little SC, Stewardson MJ, Nichols SJ, Wealands SR (2015) An online database and desktop assessment software to simplify systematic reviews in environmental science. Environ Model Softw 64:72–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  125. 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. Wiley, Chichester, pp 7–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. Williams JG, Katopodis C (2016) Incorrect application of data negates some meta-analysis results in Bunt et al. (2012). River Res Appl. doi: 10.1002/rra.3076 Google Scholar
  127. Winemiller KO, McIntyre PB, Castello L, Fluet-Chouinard E, Girarizzo T, Nam S, Baird IG et al (2016) Balancing hydropower and biodiversity in the Amazon, Congo, and Mekong. Science 351(6269):128–129PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. Zarfl C, Lumsdon AE, Berlekamp J, Tydecks L, Tockner K (2015) A global boom in hydropower dam construction. Aquat Sci 77(1):161–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. Zemlak TS, Habit EM, Walde SJ, Battini MA, Adams ED, Ruzzante DE (2008) Across the southern Andes on fin: glacial refugia, drainage reversals and a secondary contact zone revealed by the phylogeographical signal of Galaxias platei in Patagonia. Mol Ecol 17(23):5049–5061PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Martin A. Wilkes
    • 1
  • Morwenna Mckenzie
    • 1
  • J. Angus Webb
    • 2
  1. 1.Centre for Agroecology, Water and ResilienceCoventry UniversityCoventryUK
  2. 2.Department for Infrastructure EngineeringUniversity of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia

Personalised recommendations