Literature DB >> 19544735

Effectiveness of engineered in-stream structure mitigation measures to increase salmonid abundance: a systematic review.

Gavin B Stewart1, Helen R Bayliss, David A Showler, William J Sutherland, Andrew S Pullin.   

Abstract

Engineered in-stream structures are often installed to increase salmonid abundance, either for commercial gain in fisheries or for conservation purposes in degraded habitats. Having been in widespread use for the last 80 years, at an estimated cost of hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars each year, the effectiveness of these structures is still widely debated in the literature. Many studies of varying quality have been undertaken that attempt to address this issue, but it has proved difficult for practitioners to develop a consensus regarding the utility of these structures, despite their continued use. Systematic review methodology was used to formally synthesize empirical evidence regarding the effectiveness of engineered in-stream structures as a management tool to increase salmonid abundance. Meta-analysis shows that evidence regarding the effectiveness of in-stream devices is equivocal. Heterogeneity is significant both for population size and local habitat preference. This heterogeneity is related to stream width, with in-stream devices being less effective in larger streams. Consequently, widespread use of in-stream structures for restoration, particularly in larger streams, is not supported by the current scientific evidence base.

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19544735     DOI: 10.1890/07-1311.1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ecol Appl        ISSN: 1051-0761            Impact factor:   4.657


  7 in total

1.  Meta-analysis in applied ecology.

Authors:  Gavin Stewart
Journal:  Biol Lett       Date:  2009-09-23       Impact factor: 3.703

2.  Telemetry-Determined Habitat Use Informs Multi-Species Habitat Management in an Urban Harbour.

Authors:  Andrew M Rous; Jonathon D Midwood; Lee F G Gutowsky; Nicolas W R Lapointe; Rick Portiss; Thomas Sciscione; Mathew G Wells; Susan E Doka; Steven J Cooke
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2016-10-15       Impact factor: 3.266

Review 3.  Developing a broader scientific foundation for river restoration: Columbia River food webs.

Authors:  Robert J Naiman; J Richard Alldredge; David A Beauchamp; Peter A Bisson; James Congleton; Charles J Henny; Nancy Huntly; Roland Lamberson; Colin Levings; Erik N Merrill; William G Pearcy; Bruce E Rieman; Gregory T Ruggerone; Dennis Scarnecchia; Peter E Smouse; Chris C Wood
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2012-11-28       Impact factor: 11.205

Review 4.  Contribution of systematic reviews to management decisions.

Authors:  Carly N Cook; Hugh P Possingham; Richard A Fuller
Journal:  Conserv Biol       Date:  2013-08-23       Impact factor: 6.560

5.  Quantifying the effectiveness of shoreline armoring removal on coastal biota of Puget Sound.

Authors:  Timothy S Lee; Jason D Toft; Jeffery R Cordell; Megan N Dethier; Jeffrey W Adams; Ryan P Kelly
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2018-02-23       Impact factor: 2.984

6.  Biological invasions: a field synopsis, systematic review, and database of the literature.

Authors:  Edward Lowry; Emily J Rollinson; Adam J Laybourn; Tracy E Scott; Matthew E Aiello-Lammens; Sarah M Gray; James Mickley; Jessica Gurevitch
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2012-12-05       Impact factor: 2.912

7.  Evaluating impacts using a BACI design, ratios, and a Bayesian approach with a focus on restoration.

Authors:  Mary M Conner; W Carl Saunders; Nicolaas Bouwes; Chris Jordan
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2016-09-08       Impact factor: 3.307

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.