| Literature DB >> 28127493 |
Na Yang1, Yehui Zhang1, Kai Duan2.
Abstract
With the intensification of human activities over the past three decades in China, adverse effects on river ecosystem become more serious especially in the Hanjiang River. Xiangyang site is an important spawn ground for four domestic fishes in the downstream region of Hanjiang River. Based on the field survey results of macrophytes during 1997-2000 and 2013-2014, community succession of aquatic macrophytes at Xiangyang site was evaluated and discussed. Two-key ecologic-related hydrologic characteristics, flow regime and water level, were identified as the main influence factors. The EFC (environmental flow components) parameters were adopted to evaluate the alteration of flow regimes at Xiangyang site during 1941-2013. Evaluation results demonstrate a highly altered flow process after being regulated by reservoir. The flow patterns tend to be an attenuation process with no large floods occurring but a higher monthly low flow. Furthermore, the water level decreased and fluctuation reduced after the dam was built, which caused the decrease of biomass but favored the submerged macrophytes during 1995-2009. However, with the water level increasing after 2010 and gently fluctuating, due to uplift by the hydraulic projects downstream as well as the flow attenuation, the dominant position of submerged macrophytes will be weakened.Entities:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28127493 PMCID: PMC5239978 DOI: 10.1155/2017/4083696
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Scientifica (Cairo) ISSN: 2090-908X
Summary of environmental flow component (EFC) parameters and their ecosystem influences.
| EFC type | Hydrologic parameters | Ecosystem influences |
|---|---|---|
| (1) Monthly low flows | Mean or median values of low flows during each calendar month | (1) Provide adequate habitat for aquatic organisms; (2) maintain suitable water temperatures, dissolved oxygen, and water chemistry; (3) maintain water table levels in floodplain, soil moisture for plants; (4) provide drinking water for terrestrial animals; (5) keep fish and amphibian eggs suspended; (6) enable fish to move to feeding and spawning areas; (7) support hyporheic organisms (living in saturated sediments) |
|
| ||
| (2) Extreme low flows | Frequency of extreme low flows during each water year or season | (1) Enable recruitment of certain floodplain plant species; (2) purge invasive and introduced species from aquatic and riparian communities; (3) concentrate prey into limited areas to benefit predators |
|
| ||
| (3) High flow pulses | Frequency of high flow pulses during each water year or season | (1) shape physical character of river channel, including pools, riffles; (2) determine size of streambed substrates (sand, gravel, cobble); (3) prevent riparian vegetation from encroaching into channel; (4) restore normal water quality conditions after prolonged low flows, flushing away waste products and pollutants; (5) aerated eggs in spawning gravels and prevent siltation; (6) maintain suitable salinity conditions in estuaries |
|
| ||
| (4) Small floods | Frequency of small flood during each water year or season | Applies to small and large floods: |
|
| ||
| (5) Large flood | Frequency of large flood during each water year or season | Applies to small and large floods: |
The Biomass and distribution of aquatic plant communities at Xiangyang site in different periods.
| 1997–2000 | 2013-2014 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Major community type | Biomass (g/m2) | Coverage (%) | Major community type | Biomass (g/m2) | Coverage (%) |
| (1) Ass. | 12025 | 70 | (1) Ass. | 7789 | 75 |
Figure 1The environmental flow component of Xiangyang site during 1997–2014.
Figure 2The distribution of water level within a year during 1997–2014.
Comparison results of the parameters of EFC in the three periods at Xiangyang site.
| Parameters | Pre | Post | Relative alteration | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Post (all) | Post (1974–1990) | Post (1991–2013) | Post (all) | Post (1974–1990) | Post (1991–2013) | ||
| January low flow | 354 | 857 | 971 | 754 |
| 0.13 |
|
| February low flow | 354 | 852 | 931 | 786.3 |
| 0.09 |
|
| March low flow | 551 | 830 | 883 | 770 | 0.51 | 0.06 | 0.40 |
| April low flow | 724 | 853 | 936.8 | 853 | 0.18 | 0.10 | 0.18 |
| May low flow | 826 | 988 | 1040 | 893 | 0.2 | 0.05 | 0.08 |
| June low flow | 582 | 949 | 1160 | 889.3 | 0.63 | 0.22 | 0.53 |
| July low flow | 761 | 1130 | 1245 | 1125 | 0.48 | 0.10 | 0.48 |
| August low flow | 767 | 1175 | 1270 | 1090 | 0.53 | 0.08 | 0.42 |
| September low flow | 887 | 1050 | 1220 | 947.5 | 0.18 | 0.16 | 0.07 |
| October low flow | 785 | 790 | 1050 | 719 | 0.01 | 0.33 | −0.08 |
| November low flow | 624 | 764 | 941.5 | 749.5 | 0.23 | 0.23 | 0.20 |
| December low flow | 422 | 746 | 810.5 | 700 |
| 0.09 |
|
|
| |||||||
| Extreme low peak | 262 | 264 | 264 | 252 | 0.01 | 0 | −0.04 |
| Extreme low duration | 11 | 2.5 | 4.5 | 1.75 |
|
|
|
| Extreme low timing | 45.5 | 48 | 60 | 22 | 0.05 | 0.25 | −0.52 |
| Extreme low counts | 694 | 146 | 136 | 10 |
| −0.07 |
|
|
| |||||||
| High flow peak | 2430 | 1530 | 1530 | 1520 | −0.37 | 0 | −0.37 |
| High flow duration | 5 | 3 | 3.5 | 3 | −0.4 | 0.17 | −0.40 |
| High flow timing | 182 | 201 | 200 | 205 | 0.1 | 0.00 | 0.13 |
| High flow frequency | 9 | 6 | 8 | 4 | −0.33 | 0.33 | −0.56 |
| High flow rise rate | 758 | 125 | 110 | 145.5 |
| −0.12 |
|
| High flow fall rate | −408 | −110 | −86.14 | −126.2 |
| −0.22 |
|
|
| |||||||
| Small flood peak | 19700 | 19500 | 19400 | −0.01 | −0.01 | / | |
| Small flood duration | 28 | 39 | 46 | 0.39 | 0.18 | / | |
| Small flood timing | 218 | 278 | 278 | 0.28 | 0.28 | / | |
| Small flood counts | 42 | 9 | 9 | 0 |
|
| / |
| Small flood rise rate | 1408 | 4830 | 3250 |
| −0.33 | / | |
| Small flood fall rate | −800 | −532 | −1165 | −0.33 |
| / | |
|
| |||||||
| Large flood peak | 37800 | / | / | / | |||
| Large flood duration | 49 | / | / | / | |||
| Large flood timing | 225.5 | 281 | / | / | / | ||
| Large flood counts | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | / | / | / |
| Large flood rise rate | 8814 | 4830 | / | / | / | ||
| Large flood fall rate | −916 | −532.2 | / | / | / | ||
Figure 3The results of environmental flow component (EFC) from 1941 to 2013.
Figure 4The fluctuation range of water level at Xiangyang site between 1973 and 2014.
Figure 5The relation curves of water level and flow (Z~Q) of the three periods.
Figure 6The cross-section of Xiangyang site and the minimum water level in 2010, 2006, and 1973.