Maryam Farzadkhoo , Darren Jadraque , Richard T. Kingsford , Iain M. Suthers , Stefan Felder
{"title":"Entrance geometries of closed-conduit fishways to attract juvenile fishes","authors":"Maryam Farzadkhoo , Darren Jadraque , Richard T. Kingsford , Iain M. Suthers , Stefan Felder","doi":"10.1016/j.ecoleng.2024.107421","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Fishway effectiveness relies on successful fish attraction and entry, yet limited research has explored the impact of entrance design on fish attraction. This study addresses this knowledge gap by evaluating different entrance geometries, water velocity, and related characteristics of flow for attracting Australian native fishes into closed conduit fishways. Novel laboratory experiments combined detailed hydrodynamic measurements of the velocity fields with live fish experiments, using silver perch (<em>Bidyanus bidyanus</em>) and Australian bass (<em>Percalates novemaculeata</em>). Four entry geometries comprising a circular entrance (FO), a slotted entrance (slot), a semi-circular entrance (SC), and a submerged quarter circle (QC) were tested. Three attraction velocity configurations of (i) <em>V</em><sub><em>a</em></sub> = 0 m/s, (ii) constant velocity (<em>V</em><sub><em>a</em></sub> = 0.15 m/s at the entrance for each of the entrance geometries); and (iii) constant momentum flux (0.12 <em>N</em> for each entrance geometry) was examined at a water depth of <em>d</em> = 0.18 m. There were distinct differences in the attraction flow patterns between entrance geometries. The strongest turbulent kinetic energy (<em>TKE</em>) values were found near the channel bed at <em>Z</em> = 0.1 <em>d,</em> with <em>TKE</em> significantly reduced by up to 60 % in the upper layer (<em>Z</em> = 0.7 <em>d</em>). The swimming trajectories for silver perch and Australian bass varied with different entrance geometries<em>.</em> While in the SC entrance, most silver perch used the jet sidewall, for the QC entrance, silver perch displayed a preference for swimming along the middle of the channel and along the non-jet sidewall, suggesting that the flow submergence for the QC entrance may have affected fish response. The presence of silver perch and Australian bass in the entrance tube clearly suggests that they can be attracted to diverse geometries without exhibiting a distinct preference for particular combinations of entrance geometries and velocities. <em>TKE</em> values <160 cm<sup>2</sup>/s<sup>2</sup> were recommended for attracting juvenile silver perch and Australian bass with longer residence time in the entrance tube.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11490,"journal":{"name":"Ecological Engineering","volume":"209 ","pages":"Article 107421"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ecological Engineering","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0925857424002465","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Fishway effectiveness relies on successful fish attraction and entry, yet limited research has explored the impact of entrance design on fish attraction. This study addresses this knowledge gap by evaluating different entrance geometries, water velocity, and related characteristics of flow for attracting Australian native fishes into closed conduit fishways. Novel laboratory experiments combined detailed hydrodynamic measurements of the velocity fields with live fish experiments, using silver perch (Bidyanus bidyanus) and Australian bass (Percalates novemaculeata). Four entry geometries comprising a circular entrance (FO), a slotted entrance (slot), a semi-circular entrance (SC), and a submerged quarter circle (QC) were tested. Three attraction velocity configurations of (i) Va = 0 m/s, (ii) constant velocity (Va = 0.15 m/s at the entrance for each of the entrance geometries); and (iii) constant momentum flux (0.12 N for each entrance geometry) was examined at a water depth of d = 0.18 m. There were distinct differences in the attraction flow patterns between entrance geometries. The strongest turbulent kinetic energy (TKE) values were found near the channel bed at Z = 0.1 d, with TKE significantly reduced by up to 60 % in the upper layer (Z = 0.7 d). The swimming trajectories for silver perch and Australian bass varied with different entrance geometries. While in the SC entrance, most silver perch used the jet sidewall, for the QC entrance, silver perch displayed a preference for swimming along the middle of the channel and along the non-jet sidewall, suggesting that the flow submergence for the QC entrance may have affected fish response. The presence of silver perch and Australian bass in the entrance tube clearly suggests that they can be attracted to diverse geometries without exhibiting a distinct preference for particular combinations of entrance geometries and velocities. TKE values <160 cm2/s2 were recommended for attracting juvenile silver perch and Australian bass with longer residence time in the entrance tube.
期刊介绍:
Ecological engineering has been defined as the design of ecosystems for the mutual benefit of humans and nature. The journal is meant for ecologists who, because of their research interests or occupation, are involved in designing, monitoring, or restoring ecosystems, and can serve as a bridge between ecologists and engineers.
Specific topics covered in the journal include: habitat reconstruction; ecotechnology; synthetic ecology; bioengineering; restoration ecology; ecology conservation; ecosystem rehabilitation; stream and river restoration; reclamation ecology; non-renewable resource conservation. Descriptions of specific applications of ecological engineering are acceptable only when situated within context of adding novelty to current research and emphasizing ecosystem restoration. We do not accept purely descriptive reports on ecosystem structures (such as vegetation surveys), purely physical assessment of materials that can be used for ecological restoration, small-model studies carried out in the laboratory or greenhouse with artificial (waste)water or crop studies, or case studies on conventional wastewater treatment and eutrophication that do not offer an ecosystem restoration approach within the paper.