WTT Blog - Tagged with invertebrates

Low flows and salmonid rivers: an update

Posted on July 14, 2017

Low flows and salmonid rivers: an update

Jess Picken was the first to contribute to our new series of guest blogs in which she outlined plans for her PhD. And clearly, she has been busy! She is back with an update already...

To recap on my previous post, numerous studies have reported that low flow reduces the density of salmonids within streams. What is not so well-known is what, or how, other parts of the salmonids’ ecosystem are also affected by low flow. Riverflies and other aquatic macroinvertebrates make up a large proportion of juvenile salmonid diet, which is subsequently reflected in salmonid growth rate, condition and survival. Understanding how the availability of these macroinvertebrates changes with reduced summer flow is important to help conserve fish species of high UK and European importance.

My life at the moment... macroinvertebrates down the microscope!

Impacts of low flows on salmonid river ecosystems

Posted on March 22, 2017

Impacts of low flows on salmonid river ecosystems

In the first of a new series from students actively involved in research relevant to wild trout, Jessica Picken from Queen Mary University of London summarises the aims of her PhD working with the Game & Wildlife Conservation Trust and with CEFAS.

Climate change is considered to be the most critical disturbance imposed on natural systems on a global scale. Climate models predict that average temperatures in the UK will increase over the course of the next 50 years with the greatest warming in the south of England during summer months, and that annual average precipitation will reduce. However, the reduction in precipitation is expected to be more pronounced during summer than winter, whereas extreme winter precipitation is expected to become more frequent. In other words, there is likely to be an overall shift towards drier summers but wetter winters.

Workshop on developing river monitoring for citizen scientists

Posted on September 15, 2015

On behalf of WTT, I recently attended a workshop coordinated by Dr Murray Thompson (a former MSc student of mine), the aim of which was to brainstorm on how to extend and develop river monitoring of restoration projects, particularly for citizen scientists. The workshop was generously supported by Ross Brawn, a good friend and supporter of WTT. The discussions were wide ranging and there were some interesting viewpoints raised by the various contributors (from the Environment Agency, Wildlife Trusts and Rivers Trusts, academia, consultancies, the River Restoration Centre etc).

Why? Well, in the limited number of cases where monitoring (to determine whether the restoration has achieved what it set out to do) is actually considered, then the cost of that monitoring typically is a part of an already limited restoration budget. Funding before and after sample collection, particularly in the longer-term, is not always available. However, the lack of coordinated standardised restoration monitoring has led to a paucity of knowledge about the effectiveness of restoration projects. Where monitoring has been undertaken, the sampling methodologies used were often originally conceived to detect pollution but may be incompatible for detecting ecological recovery.