4.3 Article

The effect of Keepit Dam on the temperature regime of the Namoi River, Australia

期刊

RIVER RESEARCH AND APPLICATIONS
卷 18, 期 4, 页码 397-414

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS LTD
DOI: 10.1002/rra.686

关键词

Keepit Dam; Namoi River; temperature depression; fish spawning

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Modifications to water temperature caused by the release of hypolimnetic water from thermally stratified reservoirs pose a major threat to the aquatic biota of lowland rivers in Australia's Murray-Darling basin. Keepit Dam is earmarked as one of several deep-release structures in the basin causing ecologically significant temperature modification over a large length of river. This study utilized discrete and continuously monitored historical water temperature data from stream gauging stations, together with reservoir thermal profile data, to assess the impacts of Keepit Dam on the thermal regime of the Namoi River. Modifications to selected components of the river's annual temperature cycle were quantified in relation to a pre-dam temperature regime estimated from statistical models incorporating catchment, hydrological and sample attributes. Keepit Dam has modified the thermal regime of the Namoi River. The effect was greatest immediately downstream from the dam where the annual maximum daily temperature was approximately 5.0degreesC lower and occurred three weeks later than the pre-dam condition. This change was sufficient to disrupt thermal spawning cues for selected Australian native fish species. The magnitude of disturbance progressively diminished with distance from the dam. Key aspects of the river's annual temperature cycle were largely restored to the pre-dam condition within 100 river km downstream from the dam, which is closer than previous estimates. However, there was marked inter-annual variation in the magnitude of thermal modification and ecological impact as a result of year to year changes in tributary flow and reservoir behaviour. Copyright (C) 2002 John Wiley Sons, Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据