Abstract
AbstractFish body geometry is highly variable across species, affecting the fluid-body interactions fish rely on for habitat choice, feeding, predator avoidance and spawning. We hypothesize that fish body geometry may substantially influence the velocity experienced by fish swimming. To test this hypothesis, we built nine full-scale physical prototypes of common freshwater fish species. The prototypes were placed in a large laboratory flume and upstream time-averaged velocity profiles were measured with increasing distance from the anterior-most location of each body. The measurements revealed that the body geometry can have a significant influence on the velocity profile, reducing the flow field at a distance of one body length upstream of the fish. Furthermore, it was found that the upstream velocity profiles from the nine fish species investigated in this study can be normalized to a single fit curve based on the freestream velocity and fish body length under subcritical flow conditions. These findings are significant, because they show that conventional point velocity measurements overlook the reducing effect of the fish body on the upstream flow field, creating a systematically biased representation of the velocity experienced by fish in subcritical flowing waters. This bias is illustrated by velocity field maps created with and without the presence of the physical models for three different fish species. Finally, we provide an example of how point velocity measurements can be recalculated to provide upstream velocity field maps closer to “the fish’s perspective”.
Funder
Deutsche Bundesstiftung Umwelt
H2020 Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions
Estonian Research Competency Council
Technische Universität Darmstadt
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Water Science and Technology,Ecology,Aquatic Science,Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics
Reference32 articles.
1. Adam B, Lehmann B (2011) Ethohydraulik. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
2. Bleckmann H (1994) Reception of hydrodynamic stimuli in aquatic and semiaquatic animals. In: Rathmayer W (ed). Prog. Zool. Vol 41. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart, Jena, New York
3. Brosse S, Charpin N, Su G, Toussaint A, Herrera-R GA, Tedesco PA, Villéger S (2021) FISHMORPH: a global database on morphological traits of freshwater fishes. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 30(12):2330–2336. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.13395
4. Brownscombe JW, Midwood JD, Cooke SJ (2021) Modeling fish habitat: model tuning, fit metrics, and applications. Aquat Sci 83:44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00027-021-00797-5
5. Bureau of Reclamation (2001) Water Measurement Manual. 3rd ed rev repr, Tech rep. Water Resources Research Laboratory, US Department of the Interior.