DOCSLIB.ORG

Conservation of Barbel (Barbus Barbus) in the River Great Ouse

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Conservation of barbel (Barbus barbus) in the River Great Ouse being a Thesis submitted for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the University of Hull by Karen Gemma Twine BSc (Hons), Msc October 2013 i ii CONTENTS CONTENTS iii LIST OF FIGURES vi LIST OF TABLES xiii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS xiv ABSTRACT xv 1. GENERAL INTRODUCTION 1 2. THE ECOLOGY OF BARBEL AND POPULATION 8 TRENDS IN THE UNITED KINGDOM 2.1 Introduction 8 2.2 Species distribution 9 2.3 Environmental requirements for adult barbel 11 2.3.1 River flow 11 2.3.2 Water quality 12 2.3.3 Physical habitat 13 2.4 Seasonal behaviour of adult barbel 13 2.4.1 Winter 14 2.4.2 Spring 15 2.4.3 Summer 15 2.4.4 Autumn 16 2.5 Reproduction 16 2.6 Juvenile barbel 18 2.7 Physiology, morphology and anatomy 21 2.8 Food and feeding 22 2.9 Growth 22 2.10 United Kingdom barbel population information 23 2.10.1 National and regional length frequency distribution 24 2.10.2 National and regional barbel numbers 28 2.11 Great Ouse barbel population, length frequency distribution 31 and species density 2.12 Recommendations 41 3. THREATS TO THE GREAT OUSE BARBEL 43 POPULATION 3.1 Introduction 43 3.2 The River Great Ouse 43 3.3 Concerns for barbel in the River Great Ouse 45 3.3.1 Fragmentation of longitudinal connectivity and flow regulation 46 3.3.2 Physical habitat 49 3.3.3 Water quality 50 3.3.4 Climate change 54 3.3.5 Predation 59 3.4 Study areas 60 4. SEASONAL AND DIURNAL MOVEMENTS AND 62 HABITAT USE OF ADULT BARBEL 4.1 Introduction 62 4.2 Methodology 63 iii 4.2.1 Sampling sites 63 4.2.2 Sampling and tagging procedure 63 4.2.3 Monitoring 66 4.2.4 Data analysis 67 4.3 Results 68 4.3.1 Home ranges 70 4.3.2 Weekly movements: April 2010 to September 2011 71 4.3.3 Daily movements: 2010 and 2011 79 4.3.4 Spawning activities 89 4.3.5 Environmental influences on daily movements 92 4.3.6 Meso and Micro scale habitat analysis 95 4.4 Discussion 105 5. SPAWNING GRAVEL QUALITY ON THE RIVER 113 GREAT OUSE 5.1 Introduction 113 5.2 Methodology 115 5.2.1 Study site selection 115 5.2.2 Hyporheic water sampling procedure and analysis 116 5.2.3 Diatom sampling procedure and analysis 118 5.2.4 Freeze core sampling procedure and analysis 118 5.2.5 Gravel jetting procedure 120 5.3 Results 122 5.3.1 Hyporheic water quality 122 5.3.2 Periphytic diatom growth 126 5.3.3 Gravel size distribution, fine sediment and organic matter 135 infiltration. 5.4 Discussion 143 6 YOUNG BARBEL IN THE RIVER GREAT OUSE 150 6.1 Introduction 150 6.2 Methodology 151 6.2.1 Study site selection 151 6.2.2 Larval drift 153 6.2.3 Micromesh seine netting 154 6.2.4 Electric fishing 155 6.2.5 Hoop netting 156 6.2.6 Habitat analysis 157 6.2.7 Scale aging and year class strength 157 6.2.8 Diet analysis 158 6.2.9 River temperature 159 6.2.10 Community diversity 159 6.2.11 Flow on spawning gravels 160 6.3 Results 160 6.3.1 Larval drift 160 6.3.2 Sampling strategies 166 6.3.3 Population structure and year class strength 172 6.3.4 Habitat use 175 6.3.5 Diet analysis 176 6.3.6 Growth of young barbel 180 6.4 Discussion 183 7 DISCUSSION AND PRACTICAL MANAGEMENT PLANS 190 7.1 Introduction 190 7.2 Key conclusions of research 191 iv 7.3 Practical management plans 194 7.3.1 Improve longitudinal conductivity 194 7.3.2 Reduce sediment loading 198 7.3.3 Improve spawning habitat 200 7.3.4 Improve nursery and juvenile habitat 205 7.3.5 Restocking 211 7.3.6 Reduce predation 212 7.3.7 Partnerships and funding 212 7.4 Conclusion 212 REFERENCES 214 v LIST OF FIGURES 1.1 Deduced natural occurrence (a) and distribution in 1989 (b) of 1 barbel (Wheeler & Jordan 1990). 1.2 Trends in barbel catches by the Environment Agency in the Great 2 Ouse catchment, using seine netting and electric fishing methodologies. 1.3 National length frequency distribution of barbel between 1986 and 2 2008, using seine netting and electric fishing methodologies. 2.1 Deduced natural occurrence (a) and distribution in 1989 (b) of 10 barbel in the British Isles (Wheeler & Jordan 1990). 2.2 Distribution of barbel catches in EA monitoring (1990-2010). 11 2.3 Curve to show variation in growth of barbel in the British Isles 23 (Britton, unpublished data). 2.4 Length frequencies of barbel caught regionally in the Environment 25 Agency fishing surveys from 1986 to 2010. 2.5 Regional percentages of barbel stockings into rivers 2000-2012. 28 2.6 Average number of barbel caught per day electro-fished in each 29 region during Environment Agency surveys. 2.7 Length frequency distribution of barbel in each catchment in the 32 Anglian Region. 2.8 Length frequency distribution of barbel in the Great Ouse and its 33 tributaries. 2.9 Annual average densities of barbel caught be the Environment 33 Agency between 1988 and 2011. 2.10 Average density of major fish species caught in the upper Great 35 Ouse between Newport Pagnell and Bedford. 2.11 Annual Length frequency distributions of barbel in the Upper Great 37 Ouse, between 1988 and 1998. 2.12 Length frequency distribution of barbel in the Great Ouse and its 40 tributaries. 2.13 Average density per site on the River Great Ouse from 1988 to 41 2011. 3.1 The location of the River Great Ouse in the UK and the major towns 44 and tributaries along its length. 3.2 WFD classification for fish in the Great Ouse catchment. 45 3.3 WFD classification for invertebrates in the Great Ouse catchment. 46 3.4 Morphological pressures in the Anglian region, circled area 47 identifies the Great Ouse catchment. 3.5 Barriers in the Great Ouse catchment. 48 3.6 Waters used for the abstraction of drinking water in the Anglian 48 region. The circled area highlights the Great Ouse catchment. 3.7 Habitat Quality Analysis of the Great Ouse catchment. 49 3.8 Land use in the Anglian region. The circled area highlights the 51 Great Ouse catchment. 3.9 Surface water bodies in the Anglian region at risk from point source 52 pollution pressures. The circled area highlights the Great Ouse catchment. 3.10 Length frequency histogram of dace captured and recorded during 52 the River Great Ouse seine netting study. 3.11 WFD classification for Phosphate levels in the Great Ouse 53 catchment. vi 3.12 WFD classification for Dissolved oxygen in the Great Ouse 54 catchment. 3.13 Mean April and May temperatures in the UK between 1971 and 55 2000 (Met Office). Circled area highlights the Great Ouse catchment. 3.14 Mean June and July temperatures in the UK between 1971 and 2000 55 (Met Ofice). Circled area highlights the Great Ouse catchment. 3.15 Mean August and September temperatures in the UK between 1971 56 and 2000 (Met Office). Circled area highlights the Great Ouse catchment. 3.16 Daily water temperatures at Odell over an eight year period. 56 3.17 Annual number of degree days above 13.5°C, Odell. 57 3.18 Daily rainfall recorded at Bedford. 57 3.19 a) Mean daily Flow and b) Mean daily river level (above Ordinance 58 Datum) at Bedford gauging weir. 3.20 Number of crayfish traps consented by the Environment Agency in 59 the Great Ouse catchment between January 2002 and June 2013. 3.21 Study sites for the project in the Upper and Middle Great Ouse. 61 3.22 Study reach between Harrola wires (A) and Sharnbrrok weir (B). 61 4.1 Locations of electric fishing sites. From upstream site; Aquarium 63 (SP9501456480), Harrold Country Park (SP9559756519), Odell (SP9717357916) and Pinchmill (SP9971858725). Arrow indicates direction of flow, bar indicates weirs which act as the limits of the study section. 4.2 Central Area’s standard Environment Agency ‘two boat’ electric 65 fishing technique. 4.3 Scatter plot and regression analysis of air temperature (°C) and river 67 temperature (°C). 4.4 Total home range of tracked barbel based on all location data 71 collected after the first week and over the 73 week period. 4.5 Regression analysis of individual home range against length of fish. 71 4.6 (A) Average weekly movements for each barbel. (B) Average 72 weekly movements for all barbel tracked for the entire 73 weekend period. 4.7 Average weekly movements and Standard Deviation for barbel from 72 Aquarium and Harrold Country Park. 4.8 Average weekly movements of all barbel over the 73 week tracking 73 period. 4.9 Weekly distance of B3, B5, B6 and B7 from release site (0m). 74 Landmarks; Harrold Bridge 84m, Aquarium -564. 4.10 Weekly distance of B8, B9 and B10 from release site (0m). 75 Landmarks; Odell 2002m, Harrold Bridge 84m, Aquarium -564m. 4.11 Weekly distance of B11, B12, B13 and B14 from release site (0m). 76 Landmarks; Odell 1319m, Harrold Bridge -598m, Aquarium - 1247m. 4.12 Weekly distance of B15, B16 and B17 from release site (0m). 77 Landmarks; Odell 1319m, Harrold Bridge -598m, Aquarium - 1247m. 4.13 Weekly distance of B18, B19 and B20 from release site (0m).
Recommended publications
  • BONY FISHES 602 Bony Fishes

    BONY FISHES 602 Bony Fishes

    click for previous page BONY FISHES 602 Bony Fishes GENERAL REMARKS by K.E. Carpenter, Old Dominion University, Virginia, USA ony fishes constitute the bulk, by far, of both the diversity and total landings of marine organisms encoun- Btered in fisheries of the Western Central Atlantic.They are found in all macrofaunal marine and estuarine habitats and exhibit a lavish array of adaptations to these environments. This extreme diversity of form and taxa presents an exceptional challenge for identification. There are 30 orders and 269 families of bony fishes presented in this guide, representing all families known from the area. Each order and family presents a unique suite of taxonomic problems and relevant characters. The purpose of this preliminary section on technical terms and guide to orders and families is to serve as an introduction and initial identification guide to this taxonomic diversity. It should also serve as a general reference for those features most commonly used in identification of bony fishes throughout the remaining volumes. However, I cannot begin to introduce the many facets of fish biology relevant to understanding the diversity of fishes in a few pages. For this, the reader is directed to one of the several general texts on fish biology such as the ones by Bond (1996), Moyle and Cech (1996), and Helfman et al.(1997) listed below. A general introduction to the fisheries of bony fishes in this region is given in the introduction to these volumes. Taxonomic details relevant to a specific family are explained under each of the appropriate family sections. The classification of bony fishes continues to transform as our knowledge of their evolutionary relationships improves.
  • Comparison of the Myxobolus Fauna of Common Barbel from Hungary and Iberian Barbel from Portugal

    Comparison of the Myxobolus Fauna of Common Barbel from Hungary and Iberian Barbel from Portugal

    Vol. 100: 231–248, 2012 DISEASES OF AQUATIC ORGANISMS Published September 12 doi: 10.3354/dao02469 Dis Aquat Org Comparison of the Myxobolus fauna of common barbel from Hungary and Iberian barbel from Portugal K. Molnár1,*, E. Eszterbauer1, Sz. Marton1, Cs. Székely1, J. C. Eiras2 1Institute for Veterinary Medical Research, Centre for Agricultural Research, HAS, POB 18, 1581 Budapest, Hungary 2Departamento de Biologia, e CIIMAR, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade do Porto, Rua do Campo Alegre, s/n, Edifício FC4, 4169-007 Porto, Portugal ABSTRACT: We compared Myxobolus infection of common barbel Barbus barbus from the Danube River in Hungary with that in Iberian barbel Luciobarbus bocagei from the Este River in Portugal. In Hungary, we recorded 5 known Myxobolus species (M. branchialis, M. caudatus, M. musculi, M. squamae, and M. tauricus) and described M. branchilateralis sp. n. In Portugal we recorded 6 Myxobolus species (M. branchialis, M. branchilateralis sp. n., M. cutanei, M. musculi, M. pfeifferi, and M. tauricus). Species found in the 2 habitats had similar spore morphology and only slight differences were observed in spore shape or measurements. All species showed a spe- cific tissue tropism and had a definite site selection. M. branchialis was recorded from the lamellae of the gills, large plasmodia of M. branchilateralis sp. n. developed at both sides of hemibranchia, M. squamae infected the scales, plasmodia of M. caudatus infected the scales and the fins, and M. tauricus were found in the fins and pin bones. In the muscle, 3 species, M. musculi, M. pfeifferi and M. tauricus were found; however they were found in distinct locations.
  • Fish Passage and Injury Risk at a Surface Bypass of a Small-Scale Hydropower Plant

    Fish Passage and Injury Risk at a Surface Bypass of a Small-Scale Hydropower Plant

    sustainability Article Fish Passage and Injury Risk at a Surface Bypass of a Small-Scale Hydropower Plant Josef Knott, Melanie Mueller, Joachim Pander and Juergen Geist * Aquatic Systems Biology Unit, Department of Ecology and Ecosystem Management, Technical University of Munich, Mühlenweg 22, 85354 Freising, Germany; [email protected] (J.K.); [email protected] (M.M.); [email protected] (J.P.) * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +49-816-171-3767 Received: 14 October 2019; Accepted: 29 October 2019; Published: 30 October 2019 Abstract: In contrast to the efforts made to develop functioning fishways for upstream migrants, the need for effective downstream migration facilities has long been underestimated. The challenge of developing well-performing bypasses for downstream migrants involves attracting the fish to the entrance and transporting them quickly and unharmed into the tailrace. In this study, the acceptance of different opening sizes of a surface bypass as well as the injuries which fish experience during the passage were examined. Overall bypass acceptance was low compared to the turbine passage. There was no significant difference in the number of downstream moving fish between the small and the large bypass openings. Across all fish species, no immediate mortality was detected. Severe injuries such as amputations or bruises were only rarely detected and at low intensity. Scale losses, tears and hemorrhages in the fins and dermal lesions at the body were the most common injuries, and significant species-specific differences were detected. To increase bypass efficiency, it would likely be useful to offer an alternative bottom bypass in addition to the existing surface bypass.
  • Canal, Marina and Waterway

    Canal, Marina and Waterway

    NEWSLETTER - ISSUE 1 HIGHLIGHTS IN THIS ISSUE • Check out the masterplan WELCOME • Marvel at the new marina TO CAMPBELL WHARF • Discover the site’s history Welcome to the first Campbell Wharf Newsletter, bringing you all the latest news on Crest Nicholson’s exciting canalside development in Milton Keynes. Overlooking the Grand Union Canal, Campbell Wharf will include 383 new homes, a 111 berth marina, a canal-side pub, café, restaurant and a landmark new footbridge linking the two sides of the Canal. This fantastic range of amenities will bring many social and CAMPBELL WHARF FACT FILE community benefits to the local area. The development will provide a new destination on the Grand Union Canal and deliver additional access routes • 383 new homes for pedestrians and cyclists, as well as encouraging the • 111 berth marina use of existing routes around the local area. • 9,200 sq ft commercial space • Landmark footbridge • 30% affordable housing 1 DISCOVER CAMPBELL WHARF LOCATION & SURROUNDING ARCHAEOLOGY & SITE VILLAGES HISTORY Campbell Wharf sits between Newlands and Archaeological investigations were undertaken on the Campbell Park in Central Milton Keynes, with the site before any building work could begin. The team Grand Union Canal passing through the middle of uncovered ancient artefacts and remains that suggest the site. the land was used historically for farming, along with some late Iron Age and early Roman pottery - though The development stretches across the Wards of sadly not enough to suggest a domestic settlement. Campbell Park, Old Woughton and Central Milton Larger quantities of pottery artefacts were found Keynes, and is also split across the Parishes of both within an area used for crop processing, where the Campbell Park and Central Milton Keynes.
  • Landscape Character Assessment

    Landscape Character Assessment

    OUSE WASHES Landscape Character Assessment Kite aerial photography by Bill Blake Heritage Documentation THE OUSE WASHES CONTENTS 04 Introduction Annexes 05 Context Landscape character areas mapping at 06 Study area 1:25,000 08 Structure of the report Note: this is provided as a separate document 09 ‘Fen islands’ and roddons Evolution of the landscape adjacent to the Ouse Washes 010 Physical influences 020 Human influences 033 Biodiversity 035 Landscape change 040 Guidance for managing landscape change 047 Landscape character The pattern of arable fields, 048 Overview of landscape character types shelterbelts and dykes has a and landscape character areas striking geometry 052 Landscape character areas 053 i Denver 059 ii Nordelph to 10 Mile Bank 067 iii Old Croft River 076 iv. Pymoor 082 v Manea to Langwood Fen 089 vi Fen Isles 098 vii Meadland to Lower Delphs Reeds, wet meadows and wetlands at the Welney 105 viii Ouse Valley Wetlands Wildlife Trust Reserve 116 ix Ouse Washes 03 THE OUSE WASHES INTRODUCTION Introduction Context Sets the scene Objectives Purpose of the study Study area Rationale for the Landscape Partnership area boundary A unique archaeological landscape Structure of the report Kite aerial photography by Bill Blake Heritage Documentation THE OUSE WASHES INTRODUCTION Introduction Contains Ordnance Survey data © Crown copyright and database right 2013 Context Ouse Washes LP boundary Wisbech County boundary This landscape character assessment (LCA) was District boundary A Road commissioned in 2013 by Cambridgeshire ACRE Downham as part of the suite of documents required for B Road Market a Landscape Partnership (LP) Heritage Lottery Railway Nordelph Fund bid entitled ‘Ouse Washes: The Heart of River Denver the Fens.’ However, it is intended to be a stand- Water bodies alone report which describes the distinctive March Hilgay character of this part of the Fen Basin that Lincolnshire Whittlesea contains the Ouse Washes and supports the South Holland District Welney positive management of the area.
  • FIELD GUIDE to WARMWATER FISH DISEASES in CENTRAL and EASTERN EUROPE, the CAUCASUS and CENTRAL ASIA Cover Photographs: Courtesy of Kálmán Molnár and Csaba Székely

    FIELD GUIDE to WARMWATER FISH DISEASES in CENTRAL and EASTERN EUROPE, the CAUCASUS and CENTRAL ASIA Cover Photographs: Courtesy of Kálmán Molnár and Csaba Székely

    SEC/C1182 (En) FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular I SSN 2070-6065 FIELD GUIDE TO WARMWATER FISH DISEASES IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE, THE CAUCASUS AND CENTRAL ASIA Cover photographs: Courtesy of Kálmán Molnár and Csaba Székely. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular No. 1182 SEC/C1182 (En) FIELD GUIDE TO WARMWATER FISH DISEASES IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE, THE CAUCASUS AND CENTRAL ASIA By Kálmán Molnár1, Csaba Székely1 and Mária Láng2 1Institute for Veterinary Medical Research, Centre for Agricultural Research, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, Hungary 2 National Food Chain Safety Office – Veterinary Diagnostic Directorate, Budapest, Hungary FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS Ankara, 2019 Required citation: Molnár, K., Székely, C. and Láng, M. 2019. Field guide to the control of warmwater fish diseases in Central and Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular No.1182. Ankara, FAO. 124 pp. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO.
  • The Old School, Old Wolverton, Milton Keynes Introduction in Line With

    The Old School, Old Wolverton, Milton Keynes Introduction in Line With

    ANNEX Bi Expression of Interest – The Old School, Old Wolverton, Milton Keynes TO ITEM 2 Introduction In line with regulations made under the Localism Act 2011, (Assets of Community Value England Regulations 2012), Future Wolverton would like make a formal expression of interest under the Community Right to Bid for the Old School, Old Wolverton, Milton Keynes. The boundaries of the nominated land are illustrated in the plan below. Crown copyright and database rights [2012] Ordanance Survey [1000119593] The full address of the property is: Old School Old Wolverton Road Old Wolverton Milton Keynes MK12 5NH A statement of all the information which the nominator has with regard to the names of current occupants, the names and last known addresses of all those with an interest in the freehold or a lease of the site, and The freehold of the Old School is held by The Radcliffe Trust, although the building has been on a long lease to the Parochial Church Council of Holy Trinity, Old Wolverton and the Diocese of Oxford since 1974 (a copy of this lease agreement is attached). The building is divided into two halves – a residential part (the Old School House) and a community hall part (the Old School Hall). Page 1 of 4 Expression of Interest – The Old School, Old Wolverton, Milton Keynes The Old School House is currently occupied by an elderly resident who has lived in the property for over 20 years. There is no formal agreement to occupy the house, but the PCC of Holy Trinity is committed to that resident remaining in the property for the rest of their life.
  • ANNEX a to ITEM 8 Central Bletchley Regeneration Strategy

    ANNEX a to ITEM 8 Central Bletchley Regeneration Strategy

    ANNEX A TO ITEM 8 Central Bletchley Regeneration Strategy - Executive Summary Key Principles Use & activities Currently, Bletchley town centre remains comparatively unattractive to property developers and occupiers. The environment is out dated and creates a negative image for the town and its communities; reducing its ability to attract significant investment. This in turn has led to less people using the centre, creating lower expenditure and investment within the town. Bletchley needs to move forward from its existing primary role as a discount and value retailing location and strengthen its role as the second centre for the city of Milton Keynes. The challenge for the Framework is to create the conditions for Bletchley to promote itself as a place quite distinctive from the rest of Milton Keynes, yet complementary to CMK in its scale and richness of uses and activities. Achieving this will require the town to increase the diversity, quality and range of uses and activities offered in the centre. The Framework promotes the growth of key uses and activities including diversified mixed-use development; new retailing opportunities; residential town centre living; an evening economy with a range of restaurants, bars and cafes; employment opportunities to stimulate appropriate town centre employment; a new leisure centre and cultural and civic uses to fulfil Central Bletchley’s role as the city’s second centre. Access and Movement Pedestrian movement and cycle access throughout Central Bletchley is severely constrained by highly engineered road infrastructure, the railway station and sidings and through severance of Queensway caused by the Brunel Centre. Congested double roundabouts at Watling Street and Buckingham Road offer poor arrival points into the town and restrict car access into Bletchley.
  • FIELD GUIDE to WARMWATER FISH DISEASES in CENTRAL and EASTERN EUROPE, the CAUCASUS and CENTRAL ASIA Cover Photographs: Courtesy of Kálmán Molnár and Csaba Székely

    FIELD GUIDE to WARMWATER FISH DISEASES in CENTRAL and EASTERN EUROPE, the CAUCASUS and CENTRAL ASIA Cover Photographs: Courtesy of Kálmán Molnár and Csaba Székely

    SEC/C1182 (En) FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular I SSN 2070-6065 FIELD GUIDE TO WARMWATER FISH DISEASES IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE, THE CAUCASUS AND CENTRAL ASIA Cover photographs: Courtesy of Kálmán Molnár and Csaba Székely. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular No. 1182 SEC/C1182 (En) FIELD GUIDE TO WARMWATER FISH DISEASES IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE, THE CAUCASUS AND CENTRAL ASIA By Kálmán Molnár1, Csaba Székely1 and Mária Láng2 1Institute for Veterinary Medical Research, Centre for Agricultural Research, Hungarian Academy of Sciences, Budapest, Hungary 2 National Food Chain Safety Office – Veterinary Diagnostic Directorate, Budapest, Hungary FOOD AND AGRICULTURE ORGANIZATION OF THE UNITED NATIONS Ankara, 2019 Required citation: Molnár, K., Székely, C. and Láng, M. 2019. Field guide to the control of warmwater fish diseases in Central and Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia. FAO Fisheries and Aquaculture Circular No.1182. Ankara, FAO. 124 pp. Licence: CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO The designations employed and the presentation of material in this information product do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) concerning the legal or development status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of specific companies or products of manufacturers, whether or not these have been patented, does not imply that these have been endorsed or recommended by FAO in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned. The views expressed in this information product are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of FAO.
  • Milton Keynes Council Economic Development Strategy 2017 - 2027

    Milton Keynes Council Economic Development Strategy 2017 - 2027

    Economic Development Milton Keynes Council Economic Development Strategy 2017 - 2027 July 2017 www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/ business Milton Keynes Council Economic Development Strategy 2017 - 2027 2 Milton Keynes Council Economic Development Strategy 2017 - 2027 1 Milton Keynes Economic Development Strategy 2017 - 2027 Introduction 1.3 The Strategy is building on the strong foundations of Milton Keynes as an economic success. It has been 1.1 The Council Plan 2016-2020 sets out how Milton the fastest growing city in the UK over the last 30 Keynes Council will work to achieve its ambitions for years, both in terms of employment and output, and Milton Keynes. Its vision is for a thriving dynamic it has labour productivity well over the national European Destination City and to ensure a fair, average. hardworking and more equal Milton Keynes for all. The Council wants to support the growth of Milton 1.4 Milton Keynes is a key player in the UK economy, Keynes while preserving what makes it a special benefitting strongly from its preferential location place: an internationally recognised centre of within the south east of England but offering prosperity, economic innovation and cultural comparatively low occupational and employment creativity, in a high quality green space and built costs with the land assets available, many of which environment. are owned by the Council and Milton Keynes Development Partnership (MKDP), for development, 1.2 The Council Plan has three key aims for Milton expansion and continued growth. Keynes: A City of Opportunity, An Affordable City and A Healthy City. Their delivery is underpinned by 1.5 Milton Keynes has a diverse resilient economic 16 key priorities, including one specifically focused structure offering employment in a wide range of on the economy.
  • Order GASTEROSTEIFORMES PEGASIDAE Eurypegasus Draconis

    Order GASTEROSTEIFORMES PEGASIDAE Eurypegasus Draconis

    click for previous page 2262 Bony Fishes Order GASTEROSTEIFORMES PEGASIDAE Seamoths (seadragons) by T.W. Pietsch and W.A. Palsson iagnostic characters: Small fishes (to 18 cm total length); body depressed, completely encased in Dfused dermal plates; tail encircled by 8 to 14 laterally articulating, or fused, bony rings. Nasal bones elongate, fused, forming a rostrum; mouth inferior. Gill opening restricted to a small hole on dorsolat- eral surface behind head. Spinous dorsal fin absent; soft dorsal and anal fins each with 5 rays, placed posteriorly on body. Caudal fin with 8 unbranched rays. Pectoral fins large, wing-like, inserted horizon- tally, composed of 9 to 19 unbranched, soft or spinous-soft rays; pectoral-fin rays interconnected by broad, transparent membranes. Pelvic fins thoracic, tentacle-like,withI spine and 2 or 3 unbranched soft rays. Colour: in life highly variable, apparently capable of rapid colour change to match substrata; head and body light to dark brown, olive-brown, reddish brown, or almost black, with dorsal and lateral surfaces usually darker than ventral surface; dorsal and lateral body surface often with fine, dark brown reticulations or mottled lines, sometimes with irregular white or yellow blotches; tail rings often encircled with dark brown bands; pectoral fins with broad white outer margin and small brown spots forming irregular, longitudinal bands; unpaired fins with small brown spots in irregular rows. dorsal view lateral view Habitat, biology, and fisheries: Benthic, found on sand, gravel, shell-rubble, or muddy bottoms. Collected incidentally by seine, trawl, dredge, or shrimp nets; postlarvae have been taken at surface lights at night.
  • How Barriers Shape Freshwater Fish Distributions: a Species Distribution Model Approach

    How Barriers Shape Freshwater Fish Distributions: a Species Distribution Model Approach

    1 How barriers shape freshwater fish distributions: a species distribution model approach 2 3 Mathias Kuemmerlen1* [email protected] 4 Stefan Stoll1,2 [email protected] 5 Peter Haase1,3 [email protected] 6 7 1Senckenberg Research Institute and Natural History Museum Frankfurt, Department of River 8 Ecology and Conservation, Clamecystr. 12, D-63571 Gelnhausen, Germany 9 2University of Koblenz-Landau, Institute for Environmental Sciences, Fortstr. 7, 76829 Landau, 10 Germany 11 3University of Duisburg-Essen, Faculty of Biology, Essen, Germany 12 *Corresponding author: Tel: +49 6051-61954-3120 13 Fax: +49 6051-61954-3118 14 15 Running title: How barriers shape fish distributions 16 17 Word count main text = 4679 18 1 PeerJ Preprints | https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.2112v2 | CC BY 4.0 Open Access | rec: 18 Aug 2016, publ: 18 Aug 2016 19 Abstract 20 Aim 21 Barriers continue to be built globally despite their well-known negative effects on freshwater 22 ecosystems. Fish habitats are disturbed by barriers and the connectivity in the stream network 23 reduced. We implemented and assessed the use of barrier data, including their size and 24 magnitude, in distribution predictions for 20 species of freshwater fish to understand the 25 impacts on freshwater fish distributions. 26 27 Location 28 Central Germany 29 30 Methods 31 Obstruction metrics were calculated from barrier data in three different spatial contexts 32 relevant to fish migration and dispersal: upstream, downstream and along 10km of stream 33 network. The metrics were included in a species distribution model and compared to a model 34 without them, to reveal how barriers influence the distribution patterns of fish species.