Create accountLogin

Recent searches

No recent searches

Search options

Only available when logged in.
ecoevo.social is one of the many independent Mastodon servers you can use to participate in the fediverse.
Dedicated to Ecology and Evolution. We welcome academics, students, industry scientists, folks from other fields with links to E&E, scientific societies, and nature enthusiasts in general.

Administered by:

Server stats:

659
active users

ecoevo.social: AboutProfiles directoryPrivacy policy

Mastodon: AboutGet the appKeyboard shortcutsView source codev4.3.7

Public
Zach

Wow I forgot to hashtag in my toot yesterday.

I got my start in after freshman year (2013) looking at the and community plus before water was diverted into the new channel which reconnected with the .

me standing on the bank of the new stream channel
Public
Zach

Here is the aerial imagery showing the site and sampling locations. In summer 2013, all locations were sampled except the new channel since water wasn't diverted till fall 2013.

Years following till 2017 (possibly 2018 and 2019 as well) all locations were sampled except the old channel since it was capped in fall 2013.

aerial imagery showing the sample sites
Public
Zach

a article did come from this (doi.org/10.3390/w9070546).

Basically, the community in the new channel did not reflect the upstream community and communities downstream of the new channel were negatively impacted, both in the short-term.

MDPIShort-Term Impacts of Remeandering Restoration Efforts on Fish Community Structure in a Fourth-Order StreamChannel reconfiguration is a common but debated method used to restore streams, often causing disturbance and producing subsequent negative impacts on biota. Here, we report results from short-term assessment (i.e., one and three years’ post-restoration) of habitat variables (e.g., reach depth, substrate, and canopy cover) and fish community composition and structure (using electrofishing surveys; e.g., proportion of juveniles and tolerant fishes) from a 675 m section of Eagle Creek (Portage County, OH, USA) restored using channel remeandering in August 2013. Mesohabitat analysis was not conducted as part of this study. Sites upstream and downstream of restoration efforts were also monitored. Surveys were completed in 10 separate 50 m stretches: one upstream control site, three new channel sites, two old channel sites, and three downstream sites. Following restoration, fish communities in downstream sites became more similar to new channel sites and diverged from the upstream control site over time, as reflected in increased proportions of juvenile and tolerant fishes. Shifts in fish communities were not explained by habitat variables. Diversity was significantly lower in new channel sites post-restoration than in the upstream control, while downstream sites remained similarly high in diversity compared to the upstream control site over time. Overall, in the short-term, new channel colonizing communities were unable to recover to reflect upstream community composition and structure, and fish communities downstream of restoration were negatively impacted.
Public
Zach

Some that were present in downstream sites during 2013 but were rare or absent following the channel reconfiguration (new channel) were mottled sculpin, fantail darter, and grass pickerel.

Mottled sculpin
fantail darter
grass pickeral
Zach

hard to say what the site will be like in the long-term or if the goals will be met especially now that the PI has moved on. Nonetheless, I appreciate the opportunity of getting my feet wet in

Nov 06, 2022, 10:06 PM·Public·Web
0boosts·1favorite
ExploreLive feeds
About