Challenges in developing fish‐based ecological assessment methods for large floodplain rivers

Abstract

Large European floodplain rivers have a great diversity in habitats and fish fauna, but tend to be heavily modified. The complexity of these river systems and their multiple human impacts pose considerable challenges for assessment of their ecological status. This paper discusses: (1) the application of historical information on fish fauna and habitat availability to describe reference conditions; (2) responses of fish assemblages to human disturbance by comparing various rivers and river segments with different impacts and/or time series within rivers; (3) the role of floodplain water bodies in ecological assessment; and (4) monitoring of large rivers using different gears and sampling designs for main channels and floodplain habitats. The challenge for the future is to standardise and calibrate sampling methods and data to enhance the potential for ecological assessment of large rivers.

De biologische kwaliteit van waterlopen, kanaal en vijvers in het Brussels Hoofdstedelijk Gewest in 2016.

“…Voor grote rivieren (> 30 m breed) worden vaak verschillende technieken gecombineerd (Meffe & Berra, 1988;Pegg & Pierce, 2002) of alleen sleepnetten gebruikt (Angermeier & Smogor, 1994). Immers bij dieptes van meer dan 2 m wordt het moeilijk om met elektriciteit te vissen (De Leeuw et al, 2007 …”

Doorstroommoerassen en moerasbeken : typebeschrijvingen en ontwikkeling maatlatten voor de biologische kwaliteitselementen

“…Het meest gerelateerde onderzoek in Europa betreft bemonsteringen in vloedvlakten van grote rivieren (Schomaker & Wolter, 2011;Gorski et al, 2013;Navodaru et al, 2002;Grift et al, 2006;De Leeuw et al, 2007). Literatuur over moeraszones is er nauwelijks.…”

The Application of Traits-Based Assessment Approaches to Estimate the Effects of Hydroelectric Turbine Passage on Fish Populations

“…The responses of large river fish assemblages to human disturbance and the role of floodplain water bodies were considered by de Leeuw et al (2007). They noted that rheophilic and diadromous species are more sensitive to upstream and downstream migration barriers than are limnophilic (pond or lake) species.…”

“…Limnophilic fish species prefer floodplain water body habitats like side channels, connected oxbow lakes, and isolated floodplain lakes; such species are unlikely to encounter hydropower turbine intakes in their preferred habitats. Hence, the relative susceptibility to turbine passage may be initially assessed by categorizing the fish community into migratory, rheophilic, and limnophilic species (Grift et al 2006;de Leeuw et al 2007). The maximum speed at which a fish can move for several seconds (burst speed)…”