9th International Symposium on Lowland Technology
September 29-October 1, 2014 in Saga, Japan
THE RELATIONSHIP OF PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT AND
HYDRAULIC CONDITIONS ON FISH FAUNA
R.Lopa1 and Y. Shimatani2
ABSTRACT: For the evaluation of the natural environment of the small river, generally is explained by physical factors
such as flow velocity and water depth or scour/pool and riffle landscape classification. However, in small urban rivers, a
quantitative study of how many are related to what extent environmental factors and living conditions of fish, such as
shallow, riverbed materials, hydraulics conditions and other physical environmental factors and the flow rate was
classified from the perspective of the landscape has not yet been established.
The authors are being conducted in collaboration with the Fukutsu city to cooperate with the river environment which is
flowing in the Kamisaigo River, Fukuoka Prefecture, Japan. In order to evaluate this environmental restoration project,
the present study was performed the basic relationships of fish and the physical environment must be clearly and
quantitatively. The physical environment for each depth, flow velocity, bed material was measured at 50 m terrain. Next,
urban habitat fish species identification by using an electro fisher, length and weight were measured. Living conditions
and fish habitat are indicated in previous research as which is very good support. The characteristics of each
species, Zacco platypus and Rhinogobius sp.CB often have good relationships with the physical environmental
factors. Depending on the type of fish life, there are relations of the elements of the physical environment and to the
shape of the space. Research methods showed the effectiveness of a fish fauna relationship with environmental a
landscape.
Keywords: physical environment, hydraulics conditions, the perspective of landscape
INTRODUCTION
Geomorphological approaches are classed as ‘top
down’, identifying units of channel morphology
associated with different flow velocities, water depths
and bed material sizes (Jowett, 1993; Wadeson, 1994;
Padmore, 1997a in Gemma,2006). In general, fluvial geo
morphologists have described these channel form
features in relation to hydraulic conditions, bed
topography, or material size (Jowett, 1993). The
character of stream substrates is important to both
physical and biological stream functions, which directly
impacts spawning for many fish species on the law land
environmental problem.
Relying on the above mentioned issues on the
restoration projects in the law land, it is important to
recognize how fish fauna is related to physical
environment. This study is performed with the objectives
for the basic relationships between fish fauna and the
physical environment also hydraulics conditions. All of
the performances are clearly and quantitatively
implemented.
An investigation was conducted in the Kamisaigo
River during Autumn in 2011. This river is a small-scale
urban river (Class B river, the north latitudes of
33°45′24.29 and 33° 45′40.16 and east longitudes of
130° 29′55.52 and 130° 29′25.15), Figure 1. The river
was formerly straight concrete bank wall constructions,
which now proceed on the river improvement using a
variety of construction methods for each interval.
RESEARCH METHOD/STUDY DESIGN
1
2
Associate Professor of River Engineering Laboratory Hasanuddin University, Indonesia, ritalopa04@yahoo.com
Professor of Watershed Management Laboratory Kyushu University, Japan, shimatani@civil.kyushu-u.ac.jp
LOPA, et al.
Fig 1. The Landscape of Kamisaigo Rivers
This research provides a standardized methodology
for recording the physical structure of a 600m long river
segment system, incorporating meso-scale habitat
concepts such as physical environment. This research is
focused at the meso-scale of investigation within a single
river segment system and six sampling reach system
were designed to create a flow ecological habitat map at
these sites.
This monitoring includes water level survey and
water temperature survey, fisheries surveys, physical
environmental survey, geo-morphological survey and
flow ecological mapping (geo-morphological features).
This plan was designed to monitor habitat conditions of
river restoration in the Kamisaigo River post-restoration.
In this paper only the autumn data of 2011 will be
utilized and sampling occurred when rivers were at
normal base flow. The methods used for surveys were
modified from flow ecological mapping and line
transects method (quadrate method).
The fish surveys were conducted to collect
biodiversity information on the fish fauna. Fish
assemblages were sampled along the 600 m segment
system of the river using a backpack electro fisher (LR20B Smith-Root, Vancouver, WA, USA). The interval
segment system is set in one 50m per reach and divided
three parts of each reach. We were blocked by (seine)
netting to ensure population enclosure. We have
associated the fish based on visual/qualitative assessment
the flow ecology. To maximize the capture of fish, we
attempted to sample equally four river lines and a variety
of habitat types. We used intermittent shocking when
approaching structures such as downed trees, and
patches of vegetation. The fish were measured (total
number of fish, length, weight) and released alive.
(Figure 2).
ｸｽﾉｷ
サクラ
ﾄｳｶｴﾃﾞ
ﾄｳｶｴﾃﾞ
ﾐｽﾞｷ
Fig 2. Fish sampling. A. Netting fish after they had been
shocked; B.C Weighing and measuring the length of the
fish
At each reach/site we also measured river width,
water depth, velocity and the substrate as the physical
environmental data and measured the physical
environment based on incorporating a mixture of
qualitative assessment the flow ecology and line transect
method (quadrate method), Figure 3. Sampling
reaches/sites should contain meso-habitats (rapid, riffle,
run, glide, slack, shallow and scour, pool) that are
representative of the larger river length. River width is
The Relationship of Physical Environment and Hydraulic Conditions on Fish Fauna
the horizontal distance along the transect line from shore
to shore along the existing water surface. A tape measure
is used to measure water width perpendicular to the river
flow (at base flow conditions) and bank-full channel
width (to the height of the banks) at 11 evenly spaced
points along the river reach. This river is measured for
each line to describe the status of the portion of each
border line. We divide the line drawn every 5m in
investigation spot, then measure velocity and depth by
five points a line. River depth is the vertical height of the
water column from the existing water surface level to the
channel bottom. Stretch a tape across the river from the
near bank to the far, so that each point interval can be
read quickly. Cross the river at the tape and, at each
point mark beginning on the near bank, take a depth
measurement with a stainless steel ruler and record this
information, together with the distance from the nearest
bank. Check the depth at every point and record the
reading.
Current velocity was measured with a Kenek VR301 small propeller type current meter from Kenek
Corporation Japan. At least 15 readings were taken for
each river cross-section with an interval of 0.20 to 100.
Each reading lasted at least 40 seconds and was taken at
a depth of 0.6 times the total depth of current water level.
Average the flow data obtained to obtain an average
flow.
Fig 3. The line transect method
The substrate was estimated following method
described by Harrelson et al. 1994 and Kondolf et al.
2003: Photographic method: at one to five locations at
each cross-section, that the substrate sampling points
along the cross-section are located at 0, 25, 50, 75, and
100 percent of the measured wetted width, with the first
and last points located at the water's edge just within the
left and right banks. We get the earth and sand on the
line and we conduct line transect method (quadrate
method). The dominant substrate was identified visually
and by touch at 330 evenly spaced points along each
cross-section as “sand” (0.06 mm-2 mm), “gravel” (2-64
mm), “cobble” (64-250 mm), “boulders” (250-400 mm),
or “bed rocks” (>400 mm). A photograph was taken
from a height of approximately 1 – 1.5 meters with scale
in the picture, Figure 4. In addition, following a rather
descriptive approach, for each cross-section the
dominant vegetation inside and along the river was
determined as well as the % vegetation covers inside the
main river.
Fig 4. Physical Environmental Survey.
A) Measuring the river width. B) Measuring velocity
and the river depth and C) determine the substrate
Box and whisker plot and the Tukey post-hoc on a
one-way ANOVA test were used to examine the
differences in mean water depth and mean velocity,
mean substrate size, Reynolds number and Froude
number for the five habitat types based on a-biotic
environment.
The idea of the Reynolds number measure was to
quantify the effects of turbulence on habitat occurrence.
Reynolds number represents the ratio of inertial forces to
viscous forces based on current velocity, depth and
kinematic viscosity of water.
It indicates whether the flow is laminar when Re <
500, transitional/ transient when 500 < Re < 103-104, or
turbulent when 103-104 < Re. Froude number (F) is
derived from the ratio of inertial to gravity forces based
on current velocity, depth and acceleration of gravity.
Froude number is used to determine whether the flow is
subcritical and tranquil (Fr <1), critical (F = 1) or
supercritical and rapid (Fr >1).
Bulk flow Reynolds number is the dimensionless
velocity and depth/Kinematic viscosity Re = U D/v, and
Froude number is the dimensionless velocity/depth ratio
Fr = U (gD)-0.5, where U is the mean velocity (cm s-1 in
units), D is the mean water depth (cm in units), v is the
Kinematic viscosity ( 1.004 x 10-6 m2 s-1at 20oC ), and g
is the acceleration due to gravity (9.8 m s-2). The
equation adapted from Davis and Barmuta, 1989 Carling
1992 in Allan, 2007.
Box and whisker plots displayed in this analyses
consist of the following: 1) the box represents the
interquartile range encompassing all the values between
and including the 25th percentile and 75th percentile
values; 2) the triangle through the box represents the
LOPA, et al.
median (50th percentile) value; 3) the vertical lines
(whiskers) extending above and below the box represent
values that are within a distance 1.5 times greater or
lesser than the interquartile range, respectively; 4)
asterisks indicate high and/or low outlier values that are
a distance beyond 1.5 times the interquartile range. For
ANOVA tests, the Tukey- post-hoc test was used for
post hoc testing among treatments (P< 0.001).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
A total of 1917 individuals representing from 11
species were collected at the 6 sampling reaches in the
Kamisaigo River. Zacco platypus, Pseudogobio esocinus,
Odontobutis obscura and Rhinogobius sp.CB common at
all elevations and varied substrates. They often are good
relationship with physical environmental factors, Figure
5 and Figure 6.
Fig 6. The influence of physical environment (depth,
velocity and substrate) on fish fauna
Fig 5. The influence of physical environment (depth,
velocity and substrate) on fish fauna
Meanwhile Misgurnus Anguillicaudatus and Cobitis
Matsubarae have been shown to have a preference for
low velocity and to avoid the deep area. Depending on
the type of fish life, there are relations of the elements of
the physical environment. The depths and velocities in
which fish fauna were found to vary, with fish fauna
generally most abundant at depths of 10–20 cm and
mean velocities of 0.00–50 cms-1, Figure 7 and Figure 8.
Error bars represent upper and lower 95 % confidence
intervals and the Y axes have same scales. The results
clearly demonstrate that fish are distributed differently
among species across the physical environment and abiotic environment. With regard to the depth, Figure 7
showed that higher mean fish abundance values were
recorded in the 10-20 cm depth range. In the 20-30 cm
depth range, the fish abundance was in a central position,
while the deepest depth range.
Carrasius auratus langsdorfii and Gymnogobius
urotaenia were generally found in habitats with
relatively not so deep. Also Misgurnus Anguillicaudatus
and Cobitis Matsubarae have been shown to avoid the
deep area. Mean a while, Zacco platypus, Pseudogobio
esocinus, Odontobutis obscura and Rhinogobius sp.CB
common at all elevations, excluding Rhinogobius sp.OR
avoid greater than 30 cm depth range.
The Relationship of Physical Environment and Hydraulic Conditions on Fish Fauna
Figure 8 demonstrated that Pseudogobio esocinus
and Odontobutis obscura increased slightly with velocity.
Carassius auratus langsdorfii, Pseudogobio esocinus,
Misgurnus anguillicaudatus, Cobitis matsubarae,
Gymnogobius petschiliensis, Gymnogobius urotaenia,
and Rhinogobius sp.OR avoid the velocity greater than
70 cms-1, otherwise Zacco platypus, Pseudogobio
esocinus, Odontobutis obscura, and Rhinogobius sp.CB
could fine in the velocity greater than 70 cms-1 and in the
varied velocity. However Misgurnus anguillicaudatus
and Gymnogobius urotaenia only had an affinity in the
velocity less than 30 cms-1.
Fig 7. The fish abundance error bars of some species in
the Kamisaigo River within depth ranges
Fig 9. The fish abundance error bars of some species in
the Kamisaigo River within substrate ranges
Fig 8. The fish abundance error bars of some species
in the Kamisaigo River within velocity ranges
Figure 9 shows the fish abundances per substrate
type for the whole fish species. Abundances were
highest on gravel and lowest on boulder (Figure 5 and 6).
For abundance data Zacco platypus, Pseudogobio
esocinus, Odontobutis Obscura and Rhinogobius sp.CB
were normally distributed for the all of the substrate,
excluding Rhinogobius sp.OR avoid the boulder
substrate, mean a while Carrasius auratus langsdorfii,
Gymnogobius
petschiliensis,
and
Gymnogobius
urotaenia were primarily responsible for the sand and
gravel substrate. Apparently Phoxinus oxycephalus were
primarily responsible for the sand substrate, Misgurnus
anguillicaudatus for the cobble substrate and Cobitis
matsubarae for the gravel substrate.
LOPA, et al.
Based on Reynold number, all of the fish species are
absence of transient flow, the Carassius auratus
langsdorfii, Zacco platypus, Pseudogobio esocinus,
Odontobutis Obscura, Gymnogobius petschiliensis, and
Rhinogobius sp.CB, were significantly more abundant in
the turbulent flow than in the laminar flow. In contrast,
Misgurnus anguillicaudatus inhabited only in the
laminar flow, while Cobitis matsubarae, Gymnogobius
petschiliensis and Rhinogobius sp.OR inhabited only in
turbulent flow, Figure 10.
Fig 11. The fish abundance error bars of
some species in the Kamisaigo River within
Froude number range
Fig 10. The fish abundance error bars of some species
in the Kamisaigo River within Reynold number range
A representation of the Froude number and the fish
abundance enabled me to observe similarly among fish
species. All of the fish species inhabited in the
subcritical flow and all of fish species were absent in the
critical and supercritical flow, Figure 11.
As we have known that, the primary components of
the physical environment in a river are water depth,
velocity and substrate size (DVS), whereas the central
part of a channel usually has high velocities. Substrate
characteristics are significant determinants of biological
production and diversity in river, because the substrate is
a critical component of fish habitat for foraging,
sheltering from current, and spawning.
Fig 12a. The fish fauna descriptions based on
the physical environment and
the hydraulics conditions
The Relationship of Physical Environment and Hydraulic Conditions on Fish Fauna
Depending on the type of fish life, there are relations
of the elements of the physical environment and to the
shape of the space. Research methods showed the
effectiveness of a fish fauna relationship with
environmental a landscape and hydraulics conditions.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This work was supported by a grant from the Japan
Bank International Corporation and by the Watershed
Management Laboratory, Department of Urban and
Environmental Engineering, Kyushu University.
REFERENCES
Fig12b. The fish fauna descriptions based on
the physical environment and
the hydraulics conditions
In summary, the investigation of the physical
environment/a-biotic environment revealed that fish
fauna were related to the depth, velocity, substrate,
Reynold and Froude number depending on their type of
fish life, Figure 12. Gorman & Karr 1978, Schlosser
1982, Hugueny 1989 also revealed that the type of
substrate, depth and current velocity are usually stated as
being the best environmental variables predicting the
fish assemblage composition at small scales. In contrast,
M.Soesbergen 2004 stated that lowering the turbulence
in groyne fields enhances the number of fish species and
the density.
CONCLUSION
The results of habitat landscape are as follows; When
we create a diagram of the depth–velocity-substrate
distribution, we were also founded the relationships
between elements of the physical environment and the
hydraulics conditions, the main physical factors such as
water depth and velocity has been also recognized taking
into account by surrounding the landscape. Living
conditions and fish habitat are indicated in previous
research as which is very good support. Zacco platypus
and Rhinogobius sp.CB often are good relationship with
the island landscape/habitat and physical environmental
factors.
Allan, J.D. and Castillo, M.(2007). Stream Ecology
Structure and function of running waters. 2nd ed.,
XIV, (436): 75-300.
Clifford,N.J., Harmar, O.P., Harvey, G. and Petts,
G.E. ,(2006). Physical habitat, eco-hydraulics and
river design: a review and re-evaluation of some
popular
concepts
and
methods,
Aquatic
Conservation: Marine, and Freshwater Ecosystem.
(16): 389–408.
Cramer,S.P. and Ackerman,N.K.,(2009). Linking Stream
Carrying Capacity for Salmonids to Habitat Features.
American Fisheries Society Symposium (71):225–
254.
Foltz, J. W. (1982). Fish diversity and abundance in
relation to stream habitat stream characteristic,
Proceedeng
Annual
Conference
Southeast
Association Fish and Wildlife Agencies (36): 305311.
Gorman, O.T. and Karr, J. R.( 1978). Habitat structure
and stream fish communities. Ecology (59): 507–515.
Harrelson and. Kondolf..Monitoring and measurement
techniques on water fluxes and sediment export in
drylandecosystems
http://brandenburg.geoecology.unipotsdam.de/projekt
e/sesam/download/Projects/Project_Fieldwork_Tech
niques.pdf
Harvey,G.L.(2006). Characterising physical habitat at
the reach scale, River Tern Shropshire, the University
of Nottingham Thesis.
Kemp, J. L., Harper, D.M. and.Crosa, G. A.,(2000). The
habitat-scale ecohydraulics of rivers. Ecological
Engineering(16):17–29.
www.elsevier.com:locate:ecoleng
Lopa, R.,(2012). An evaluation of river restoration
effectiveness in a housing land development area,
The University of Kyushu Dissertation.
Lorenzoni,M., Mearelli, M. and Ghetti, L.,(2006).
Native and Exotic Fish Species in the Tibet River
LOPA, et al.
Watershed (Umbria-Italy) and Their Relationship to
the Longitudinal Gradient, Bull. Fr. Pêche Piscic
(382): 19-44.
Maddock,I. (1999). The importance of physical
assessment for evaluating river health, Worcester
WR2 6AJ,U.K., Freshwater Biology (41):373-391.
Nakamura, F., Inahara, S., and Kaneko, M.( 2005). A
hierarchical approach to ecosystem assessment of
restoration planning at regional, catchment and local
scales in Japan. Landscape Ecol Eng(1),: 43–52.
Osmundson, Ryel, R. J., Lamarra, V. L. and Pitlick,
J.( 2002). Flow-sediment-biota relations: implication
for river regulation effects on native fish abundance.
Ecological Applications 12 (6): 1719–1739.
Royal Haskoning Team,(2007). Physical and biological
monitoring of Stream restoration projects Monitoring
Protocol.. Natural England Final Protocol LIFE05
UK/NAT/000143 9S0459.
Shimatani,Y.,(2000). Conservation and Restoration of
River Environment: Practice of Nature-abundant
River Restoration.
Smokorowski,K.E. and Pratt, T.C.,(2007). Effect of a
change in physical structure and covers on fish and
fish habitat in freshwater ecosystem – a review and
meta analyses, the NRC Research Press Web site,
http://er.nrc.ca
Soesbergen, M.,(2004). The influence of the structure of
groyne fields on the invertebrate fauna in the river
Waal (The Netherlands). Ecohydraulics (E) (1): 454457.
Vermont Agency of Natural Resources,(2009)
Delineation of Stream Bed Features, Stream
Geomorphic Assessment Handbooks.
Vitale, A. J., Lamb, D., Peters, R. L., and Chess D.,
(2002). Coeur D'Alene Tribe Fisheries Program
Research. Research Monitoring and Evaluation Plan.
BPA Project 1990-044-00 Implementation of
Fisheries Enhancement Efforts on the Coeur D’Alene
Reservation.