Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst.
Number 420, 2019
Topical Issue on Fish Ecology
Article Number 41
Number of page(s) 7
Published online 18 October 2019
  • Arrington DA, Winemiller KO. 2003. Diel changeover in sandbank fish assemblages in a neotropical floodplain river. J Fish Biol 63: 442–459. [Google Scholar]
  • Baumgartner LJ, Stuart IG, Zampatti BP. 2008. Determining diel variation in fish assemblages downstream of three weirs in a regulated lowland river. J Fish Biol 72: 218–232. [Google Scholar]
  • Bates D, Maechler M, Bolker B, Walker S. 2015. Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. J Stat Soft 67: 1–48. [NASA ADS] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Clark CW, Levy DA. 1988. Diel vertical migrations by juvenile sockeye salmon and the antipredator window. Am Nat 131: 271–290. [Google Scholar]
  • Copp GH. 2010. Patterns of diel activity and species richness in young and small fishes of European streams: a review of 20 years of point abundance sampling by electrofishing. Fish Fisheries 11: 439–460. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Copp GH, Jurajda P. 1993. Do small riverine fish move inshore at night? J Fish Biol 43 (Suppl A): 229–241. [Google Scholar]
  • Copp GH, Jurajda P. 1999. Size-structured diel use of river banks by fish. Aquat Sci 61: 75–91. [Google Scholar]
  • Copp GH, Vranovský M, Černý J, Kováč V. 2005. Diel dynamics of young fishes and zooplankton in a lentic side-channel of the River Danube. Biologia (Bratislava) 60: 179–188. [Google Scholar]
  • Czeglédi I, Sály P, Takács P, Dolezsai A, Vitál Z, Nagy AS, Erős T. 2016. Do diel variations in stream fish assemblages depend on spatial positioning of the sampling sites and seasons? Acta Zool Acad Sci Hungaricae 62: 175–190. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gliwicz ZM, Jachner A. 1992. Diel migrations of juvenile fish: a ghost of predation past or present? Arch Hydrobiol 124: 385–410. [Google Scholar]
  • Helfman GS. 1993. Fish behavior by day, night, and twilight, in Pitcher TJ, ed. Behaviour of teleost fishes. London: Chapman and Hall, 479–512. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Jack JD, Fang W, Thorp JH. 2006. Vertical, lateral and longitudinal movement of zooplankton in a large river. Freshwat Biol 51: 1646–1654. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Janáč M, Jurajda P. 2013. Diel differences in 0+ fish samples: effect of river size and habitat. River Res Appl 29: 90–98. [Google Scholar]
  • Kellerhals R, Church M. 1989. The morphology of large rivers: characterization and management. In: Dodge DP, ed. Proceedings of the International Large River Symposium. Can Spec Publ Fish Aquat Sci 106: 31–48. [Google Scholar]
  • Koščo J, Pekárik L, Nowak M, Košuthová L. 2008. Diel changes in the fish assemblages in Eastern Slovakian lowland rivers. In: Kopp R, ed. Proceedings of the XI Czech ichthyological conference. Brno: MZLU, 126–131. [Google Scholar]
  • Kottelat M, Freyhof J. 2007. Handbook of European freshwater fishes. Cornol: Kottelat and Berlin: Freyhof. [Google Scholar]
  • Lucas M, Baras E, Thom TJ, Duncan A, Slavík O. 2001. Migration of freshwater fishes. Oxford: Blackwell Science, 412 p. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Lüdecke D. 2018. ggeffects: Tidy data frames of marginal effects from regression models. J Open Source Softw 3: 772. [Google Scholar]
  • Mastrorillo S, Copp GH. 2005. Diel dynamics of young and small fishes in a side-channel of the River Garonne, France, before and after a late-summer spate. Ann Limnol − Int J Lim 41: 15–25. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Mehner T. 2012. Diel vertical migration of freshwater fishes − proximate triggers, ultimate causes and research perspectives. Freshwat Biol 57: 1342–1359. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • R Development Core Team. 2019. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. [Google Scholar]
  • Roach KA, Winemiller KO. 2011. Diel turnover of assemblages of fish and shrimp on sandbanks in a temperate floodplain river. Trans Am Fish Soc 140: 84–90. [Google Scholar]
  • Scheuerell MD, Schindler DE. 2003. Diel vertical migration by juvenile sockeye salmon: empirical evidence for the antipredation window. Ecology 84: 1713–1720. [Google Scholar]
  • Schiemer F, Keckeis H, Reckendorfer W, Winkler G. 2001. The “inshore retention concept” and its significance for large river. Arch Hydrobiol 12 (Suppl.): 509–516. [Google Scholar]
  • Willis SC, Winemiller KO, Lopez-Fernandez H. 2005. Habitat structural complexity and morphological diversity of fish assemblages in a Neotropical floodplain river. Oecologia (Berlin) 142: 284–295. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Current usage metrics show cumulative count of Article Views (full-text article views including HTML views, PDF and ePub downloads, according to the available data) and Abstracts Views on Vision4Press platform.

Data correspond to usage on the plateform after 2015. The current usage metrics is available 48-96 hours after online publication and is updated daily on week days.

Initial download of the metrics may take a while.