EDP Sciences logo
Submit your paper
Search
Menu
All issues No 426 (2025) Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst., 426 (2025) 24 References
Issue
Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst.
Number 426, 2025
Multidisciplinary solutions for conservation
Article Number 24
Number of page(s) 30
DOI https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2025018
Published online 23 September 2025
  • Abernethy EF, Muehlbauer JD, Kennedy TA, Tonkin JD, Van Driesche R, Lytle DA. 2021. Hydropeaking intensity and dam proximity limit aquatic invertebrate diversity in the Colorado River Basin. Ecosphere 12: e03559. [Google Scholar]
  • Acreman M, Arthington AH, Colloff MJ, Couch C, Crossman ND, Dyer F, Overton I, et al. 2014. Environmental flows for natural, hybrid, and novel riverine ecosystems in a changing world. Front Ecol Environ 12: 466–473. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Acreman MC, Ferguson AJD. 2010. Environmental flows and the European water framework directive. Freshw Biol 55: 32–48. [Google Scholar]
  • Alberts JM, Sullivan SMP, Kautza A. 2013. Riparian swallows as integrators of landscape change in a multiuse river system: implications for aquatic-to-terrestrial transfers of contaminants. Sci Total Environ 463: 42–50. [Google Scholar]
  • Algera DA, Rytwinski T, Taylor JJ, Bennett JR, Smokorowski KE, Harrison PM, Clarke KD, et al. 2020. What are the relative risks of mortality and injury for fish during downstream passage at hydroelectric dams in temperate regions? A systematic review. Environ Evid 9: 1–36. [Google Scholar]
  • Altanov VY, Jähnig SC, He F. 2025. A systematic map of hydropower impacts on megafauna at the land-water interface. Biol Conserv 305: 111092. [Google Scholar]
  • Amaral SV, Coleman BS, Rackovan JL, Withers K, Mater B. 2018. Survival of fish passing downstream at a small hydropower facility. Mar Freshw Res 69: 1870. [Google Scholar]
  • Andriolo A, Piovezan U, Costa MJ, Torres HA, Vogliotti A, Zerbini AN, Duarte J. 2013. Severe population decline of marsh deer, Blastocerus dichotomus (Cetartiodactyla: Cervidae), a threatened species, caused by flooding related to a hydroelectric power plant. Zoologia (Curitiba) 30: 630–638. [Google Scholar]
  • Antognazza CM, Quadroni S, Vanetti I, De Santis V, Crosa G, Zaccara S. 2023. The increasing spread of the European barbel in the Italian large lowland rivers is threatening the native species. J Limnol 81 https://dx.doi.org/10.4081/jlimnol.2022.2136 [Google Scholar]
  • Appelqvist T, Bengtsson O. 2007. Åtgärdsprogram för alkonblåvinge och klockgentiana 2007-2011: Maculinea alcon och Gentiana pneumonanthe: hotkategori: sårbara (vu). Naturvårdsverket., Stockholm. [Google Scholar]
  • Appelberg M, Svenson T. 2001. Long-term ecological effects of liming—The ISELAW Programme. Water Air Soil Pollut 130: 1745–1750. [Google Scholar]
  • Armanini DG, Horrigan N, Monk WA, Peters DL, Baird DJ. 2011. Development of a benthic macroinvertebrate flow sensitivity index for Canadian rivers. River Res Appl 27: 723–737. [Google Scholar]
  • Armanini DG, Chaumel AI, Monk WA, Marty J, Smokorowski K, Power M, Baird DJ. 2014. Benthic macroinvertebrate flow sensitivity as a tool to assess effects of hydropower related ramping activities in streams in Ontario (Canada). Ecol Ind 46: 466–476. [Google Scholar]
  • Arthington AH, Bunn SE, Poff NL, Naiman RJ. 2006. The challenge of providing environmental flow rules to sustain river ecosystems. Ecol Appl 16: 1311–1318. [Google Scholar]
  • Arthington AH, Tickner D, McClain ME, Acreman MC, Anderson EP, Babu S, Dickens CWS, et al. 2024. Accelerating environmental flow implementation to bend the curve of global freshwater biodiversity loss. Environ Rev 32: 387–413. [Google Scholar]
  • Ashraf FB, Haghighi AT, Riml J, Alfredsen K, Koskela JJ, Kløve B, Marttila H. 2018. Changes in short term river flow regulation and hydropeaking in Nordic rivers. Sci Rep 8: 17232. [Google Scholar]
  • Åström J, Ødegaard F, Hanssen O, Åström S. 2017. Endring i leveområder for elvesandjeger og stor elvebreddedderkopp ved Gaula. Forekomst og dynamikk av elveører fra 1947 til 2014. Norsk Institutt for Naturforskning. https://brage.nina.no/nina-xmlui/handle/11250/2429548 (Accessed 13 January 2025). [Google Scholar]
  • Atkinson CL, Vaughn CC. 2015. Biogeochemical hotspots: temporal and spatial scaling of the impact of freshwater mussels on ecosystem function. Freshw Biol 60: 563–574. [Google Scholar]
  • Auer S, Zeiringer B, Führer S, Tonolla D, Schmutz S. 2017. Effects of river bank heterogeneity and time of day on drift and stranding of juvenile European grayling (Thymallus thymallus L.) caused by hydropeaking. Sci Total Environ 575: 1515–1521. [Google Scholar]
  • Baladrón A, Bejarano MD, Sarneel JM, Boavida I. 2022. Trapped between drowning and desiccation: Riverine plants under hydropeaking. Sci Total Environ 829: 154451. [Google Scholar]
  • Bartoň D, Brabec M, Sajdlová Z, Souza AT, Duras J, Kortan D, Blabolil P, et al. 2022. Hydropeaking causes spatial shifts in a reproducing rheophilic fish. Sci Total Environ 806: 150649. [Google Scholar]
  • Bartoň D, Sajdlová Z, Kolařík T, Kubečka J, Duras J, Kortan D, Šmejkal M. 2023. Use of a flow deflector to protect rheophilic fish spawning grounds during hydropeaking. River Res Appl 39: 561–569. [Google Scholar]
  • Bastino V, Boughaba J, van de Bund W. 2021. Biodiversity strategy 2030 barrier removal for river restoration. Luxembourg: European Commission. [Google Scholar]
  • Bätz N, Judes C, Vanzo D, Lamouroux N, Capra H, Baumgartner J, Berger B, et al. 2024. Patch-scale habitat dynamics: three metrics to assess ecological impacts of frequent hydropeaking. J Ecohydraulics: 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/24705357.2024.2426790 [Google Scholar]
  • Baxter RM. 1977. Environmental Effects of Dams and Impoundments. Ann Rev Ecol Syst 8: 255–283. [Google Scholar]
  • Baxter CV, Fausch KD, Carl Saunders W. 2005. Tangled webs: reciprocal flows of invertebrate prey link streams and riparian zones. Freshw Biol 50: 201–220. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Baumgartner LJ, Boys C, Marsden T, McPherson J, Ning N, Phonekhampheng O, Robinson W, et al. 2020. A cone fishway facilitates lateral migrations of tropical river-floodplain fish communities. Water 12: 513. [Google Scholar]
  • Bednarek AT, Hart DD. 2005. Modifying dam operations to restore rivers: ecological responses to Tennessee River dam mitigation. Ecol Appl 15: 997–1008. [Google Scholar]
  • Beeman JW, Maule AG. 2006. Migration depths of juvenile Chinook salmon and steelhead relative to total dissolved gas supersaturation in a Columbia River reservoir. Trans Am Fish Soc 135: 584–594. [Google Scholar]
  • Bejarano MD, Jansson R, Nilsson C. 2018. The effects of hydropeaking on riverine plants: a review. Biol Rev 93: 658–673. [Google Scholar]
  • Bejarano MD, Sordo‐Ward Á, Alonso C, Jansson R, Nilsson C. 2020. Hydropeaking affects germination and establishment of riverbank vegetation. Ecol Appl 30: 02076. [Google Scholar]
  • Belletti B, de Leaniz CG, Jones J, Bizzi S, Börger L, Segura G, Castelletti A, et al. 2020. More than one million barriers fragment Europe's rivers. Nature 588: 436–441. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Bempah G, Grant MK, Lu C, Borzée A. 2022. The direct and indirect effects of damming on the Hippopotamus amphibius population abundance and distribution at Bui National Park, Ghana. Nat Conserv 50: 175–201. [Google Scholar]
  • Benejam L, Saura-Mas S, Bardina M, Solà C, Munné A, García-Berthou E. 2016. Ecological impacts of small hydropower plants on headwater stream fish: from individual to community effects. Ecol Freshw Fish 25: 295–306. [Google Scholar]
  • Benitez J-P., Matondo BN, Dierckx A, Ovidio M. 2015. An overview of potamodromous fish upstream movements in medium-sized rivers, by means of fish passes monitoring. Aquat Ecol 49: 481–497. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Birnie‐Gauvin K, Aarestrup K, Riis TMO, Jepsen N, Koed A. 2017a. Shining a light on the loss of rheophilic fish habitat in lowland rivers as a forgotten consequence of barriers, and its implications for management. Aquat Conserv: Marine Freshw Ecosyst 27: 1345–1349. [Google Scholar]
  • Birnie-Gauvin K, Larsen MH, Nielsen J, Aarestrup K. 2017. 30 years of data reveal dramatic increase in abundance of brown trout following the removal of a small hydrodam. J Environ Manag 204: 467–471. [Google Scholar]
  • Birnie-Gauvin K, Tummers JS, Lucas MC, Aarestrup K. 2017. Adaptive management in the context of barriers in European freshwater ecosystems. J Environ Manag 204: 436–441. [Google Scholar]
  • Biggs BJF. 1996. Hydraulic habitat of plants in streams. Regul Rivers: Res Manag 12: 131–144. [Google Scholar]
  • Bipa NJ, Stradiotti G, Righetti M, Pisaturo GR. 2023. Impacts of hydropeaking: a systematic review. Sci Total Environ: 169251. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.169251 [Google Scholar]
  • Birk S, Bonne W, Borja A, Brucet S, Courrat A, Poikane S, Solimini A, et al. 2012. Three hundred ways to assess Europe's surface waters: an almost complete overview of biological methods to implement the Water Framework Directive. Ecol Ind 18: 31–41. [Google Scholar]
  • Blabolil P, Říha M, Ricard D, Peterka J, Prchalova M, Vašek M, Čech M, et al. 2017. A simple fish-based approach to assess the ecological quality of freshwater reservoirs in Central Europe. Knowl Manag Aquat Ecosyst: 53. https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2017043 [Google Scholar]
  • Bohlin T, Hamrin S, Heggberget TG, Rasmussen G, Saltveit SJ. 1989. Electrofishing—Theory and practice with special emphasis on salmonids. Hydrobiologia 173: 9–43. [Google Scholar]
  • Bondar-Kunze E, Tritthart M, Hein T. 2015. The influence of short term water level fluctuations and desiccation stress on periphyton development at a riparian zone of a large regulated river. Fundam Appl Limnol: 283–296. [Google Scholar]
  • Bondar-Kunze E, Kasper V, Hein T. 2021. Responses of periphyton communities to abrupt changes in water temperature and velocity, and the relevance of morphology: A mesocosm approach. Sci Total Environ 768: 145200. [Google Scholar]
  • Borja A, Elliott M. 2007. What does ‘good ecological potential’ mean, within the European water framework directive? Marine Pollut Bull 54: 1559–1564. [Google Scholar]
  • Boulton AJ, Findlay S, Marmonier P, Stanley EH, Valett HM. 1998. The functional significance of the hyporheic zone in streams and rivers. Ann Rev Ecol Evol Syst 29: 59–81. [Google Scholar]
  • Botelho A, Ferreira P, Lima F, Pinto LMC, Sousa S. 2017. Assessment of the environmental impacts associated with hydropower. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 70: 896–904. [Google Scholar]
  • Brauns M, Garcia X-F., Pusch MT. 2008. Potential effects of water-level fluctuations on littoral invertebrates in lowland lakes. In Wantzen KM, Rothhaupt K-O, Mörtl M, Cantonati M, Tóth LG, Fischer P, eds. Ecological Effects of Water-Level Fluctuations in Lakes, Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands, pp. 5–12. [Google Scholar]
  • Brown JH, Gillooly JF, Allen AP, Savage VM, West GB. 2004. Toward a metabolic theory of ecology. Ecology 85: 1771–1789. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Brenkman SJ, Peters RJ, Tabor RA, Geffre JJ, Sutton KT. 2019. Rapid Recolonization and life history responses of bull trout following dam removal in Washington's Elwha River. North Am J Fish Manag 39: 560–573. [Google Scholar]
  • Brittain JE, Saltveit SJ. 1989. A review of the effect of river regulation on mayflies (Ephemeroptera). Regul Rivers: Res Manag 3: 191–204. [Google Scholar]
  • Brooks AJ, Wolfenden B, Downes BJ, Lancaster J. 2018. Barriers to dispersal: The effect of a weir on stream insect drift. River Res Appl 34: 1244–1253. [Google Scholar]
  • Bruder A, Tonolla D, Schweizer SP, Vollenweider S, Langhans SD, Wüest A. 2016. A conceptual framework for hydropeaking mitigation. Sci Total Environ 568: 1204–1212. [Google Scholar]
  • Bruneaux M, Visse M, Gross R, Pukk L, Saks L, Vasemägi A. 2017. Parasite infection and decreased thermal tolerance: Impact of proliferative kidney disease on a wild salmonid fish in the context of climate change. Funct Ecol 31: 216–226. [Google Scholar]
  • Bruno MC, Siviglia A, Carolli M, Maiolini B. 2013. Multiple drift responses of benthic invertebrates to interacting hydropeaking and thermopeaking waves. Ecohydrology 6: 511–522. [Google Scholar]
  • Bunn SE, Arthington AH. 2002. Basic principles and ecological consequences of altered flow regimes for aquatic biodiversity. Environ Manag 30: 492–507. [Google Scholar]
  • Bunt C, Castro‐Santos T, Haro A. 2012. Performance of fish passage structures at upstream barriers to migration. River Res Appl 28: 457–478. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Calles O, Nyberg L, Greenberg L. 2007. Temporal and spatial variation in quality of hyporheic water in one unregulated and two regulated boreal rivers. River Res Appl 23: 829–842. [Google Scholar]
  • Calles O, Karlsson S, Hebrand M, Comoglio C. 2012. Evaluating technical improvements for downstream migrating diadromous fish at a hydroelectric plant. Ecol Eng 48: 30–37. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Calles O, Rivinoja P, Greenberg L. 2013a. A Historical perspective on downstream passage at hydroelectric plants in Swedish Rivers. In: Ecohydraulics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. pp. 309–322. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118526576.ch18. [Google Scholar]
  • Carlson PE, Donadi S, Sandin L. 2018. Responses of macroinvertebrate communities to small dam removals: Implications for bioassessment and restoration. J Appl Ecol 55: 1896–1907. [Google Scholar]
  • Carlson PE. 2025. Development of a benthic macroinvertebrate-based multimetric index to quantify riverbed substrate condition in Swedish streams. J Freshw Ecol 40: 2486247. [Google Scholar]
  • Carmignani JR, Roy AH. 2017. Ecological impacts of winter water level drawdowns on lake littoral zones: a review. Aquat Sci 79: 803–824. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Carvalho L, Mackay EB, Cardoso AC, Baattrup-Pedersen A, Birk S, Blackstock KL, Borics G, et al. 2019. Protecting and restoring Europe's waters: an analysis of the future development needs of the Water Framework Directive. Sci Total Environ 658: 1228–1238. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Castro-Santos T, Cotel A, Webb P. 2009. Fishway evaluations for better bioengineering: an integrative approach. In: Challenges for Diadromous Fishes in a Dynamic Global Environment, Bethesda, MD, USA: American Fisheries Society Symposium, pp. 557–575. [Google Scholar]
  • Caudill CC, Daigle WR, Keefer ML, Boggs CT, Jepson MA, Burke BJ, Zabel RW, et al. 2007. Slow dam passage in adult Columbia River salmonids associated with unsuccessful migration: delayed negative effects of passage obstacles or condition-dependent mortality? Can J Fish Aquat Sci 64: 979–995. [Google Scholar]
  • Cavallo C, Sarno L, Papa MN, Negro G, Vezza P, Ruello G, Gargiulo M. 2025. Estimating dry bed periods in non-perennial rivers using Sentinel-2 satellite data. J Hydrol 660: 133416. [Google Scholar]
  • CEN 2017. European Committee for Standardization. 2017. Water quality – Guidance standard on monitoring freshwater pearl mussel (Margaritifera margaritifera) populations and their environment. EN 16859:2017. Brussels. [Google Scholar]
  • CEN. 2021. Water quality – Guidance for assessing the efficiency and related metrics of fish passage solutions using telemetry. EN 17233:2021. Brussels [Google Scholar]
  • Chambers PA, Prepas EE, Hamilton HR, Bothwell ML. 1991. Current velocity and its effect on aquatic macrophytes in flowing waters. Ecol Appl 1: 249–257. [Google Scholar]
  • Clifford NJ. 2007. River restoration: paradigms, paradoxes and the urban dimension. Water Supply 7: 57–68. [Google Scholar]
  • Connor EJ, Pflug DE. 2004. Changes in the distribution and density of pink, chum, and Chinook salmon spawning in the upper Skagit River in response to flow management measures. North Am J Fish Manag 24: 835–852. [Google Scholar]
  • Cott PA, Sibley PK, Somers WM, Lilly MR, Gordon AM. 2008a. A review of water level fluctuations on aquatic biota with an emphasis on fishes in ice-covered lakes. J Am Water Resour Assoc 44: 343–359. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Cott PA, Sibley PK, Gordon AM, Bodaly RA, Mills KH, Somers WM, Fillatre GA. 2008b. Effects of water withdrawal from ice-covered lakes on oxygen, temperature, and fish. J Am Water Resour Assoc 44: 328–342. [Google Scholar]
  • Cousin B, Dolédec S, Luquet E, Olivier J-M. 2025. Hydropeaking and channelization threaten young-of-the-year fish—the case of the chub (Squalius cephalus L.) in the Rhône River. River Res Appl. https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.70025 [Google Scholar]
  • Coutant CC, Whitney RR. 2000. Fish behavior in relation to passage through hydropower turbines: a review. Trans Am Fish Soc 129: 351–380. [Google Scholar]
  • Couto TB, Olden JD. 2018. Global proliferation of small hydropower plants − science and policy. Front Ecol Environ 16: 91–100. [Google Scholar]
  • Croijmans L, De Jong JF, Prins HHT. 2021. Oxygen is a better predictor of macroinvertebrate richness than temperature—A systematic review. Environ Res Lett 16: 023002. [Google Scholar]
  • Cupertino A, Dufour S, Rodríguez-González PM. 2024. Chasing success: A review of vegetation indicators used in riparian ecosystem restoration monitoring. Ecol Ind 166: 112371. [Google Scholar]
  • Czúcz B, Keith H, Maes J, Driver A, Jackson B, Nicholson E, Kiss M, Obst C. 2021. Selection criteria for ecosystem condition indicators. Ecol Indic 133: 108376. [Google Scholar]
  • Daufresne M, Veslot J, Capra H, Carrel G, Poirel A, Olivier J-M., Lamouroux N. 2015. Fish community dynamics (1985-2010) in multiple reaches of a large river subjected to flow restoration and other environmental changes. Freshw Biol 60: 1176–1191. [Google Scholar]
  • Decker AS, Bradford MJ, Higgins PS. 2008. Rate of biotic colonization following flow restoration below a diversion dam in the Bridge River, British Columbia. River Res Appl 24: 876–883. [Google Scholar]
  • de Moraes KR, Souza AT, Muška M, Hladík M, Čtvrtlíková M, Draštík V, Kolařík T, et al. 2023. Artificial floating islands: a promising tool to support juvenile fish in lacustrine systems. Hydrobiologia 850: 1969–1984. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Dibble ED, Killgore KJ, Harrel SL. 1997. Assessment of fish-plant interactions. Miscellaneous Paper A-97-6. U.S Army Corps of Engineers. Washington DC, USA. [Google Scholar]
  • Ding L, Chen L, Ding C, Tao J. 2019. Global trends in dam removal and related research: a systematic review based on associated datasets and bibliometric analysis. Chin Geogr Sci 29: 1–12. [Google Scholar]
  • Dobbs KDR, Lynn TJ, Bruce MR, Reyes-Prieto A, Samways KM, Curry RA, Duffy MS. 2024. Freshwater mussel glochidia infesting anadromous Gaspereau below a hydroelectric generating station: implications for mussel conservation. Hydrobiologia 851: 617–632. [Google Scholar]
  • Drakare S, Holmgren K, Näslund J, Vrede T. 2022. Detta är IKEU: Integrerad Kalkuppföljning-programmets innehåll och resultat åren 2008-2021. Rapport/Sveriges Lantbruksuniversitet, Institutionen för vatten och miljö, 2022: 4. [Google Scholar]
  • Duarte S, Leite BR, Feio MJ, Costa FO, Filipe AF. 2021. Integration of DNA-based approaches in aquatic ecological assessment using benthic macroinvertebrates. Water 13: 331. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Dvwk FAO. 2002. Fish passes: design, dimensions, and monitoring. [Google Scholar]
  • DWA. 2005. Fish protection technologies and downstream fishways. Dimensioning, Design, Effectiveness Inspection. German Association for Water, Wastewater and Waste (DWA), Hennef. [Google Scholar]
  • Ebel G. 2013. Fischschutz und Fischabstieg an Wasserkraftanlagen. Handbuch Rechen-und Bypasssysteme. Ingenieurbiologische Grundlagen, Modellierung und Prognose, Bemessung und Gestaltung. Büro für Gewässerökologie und Fischereibiologie Dr. Ebel, Halle (Saale). [Google Scholar]
  • Eggers F, Calles O, Watz J, Österling M, Hebrand V. 2024. Methods for the assessment of fishways (Upstream Fish Passage). In Kalinowska MB, Mrokowska MM, Rowiński PM eds. Advances in Hydraulic Research, Springer Nature Switzerland, pp. 67–79. [Google Scholar]
  • Egwumah F, Po E, Edet D. 2017. Paramount roles of wild birds as bioindicators of contamination. Int J Avian Wildl Biol 2: 194–199. [Google Scholar]
  • Ellis LM, Crawford CS, Molles Jr, MC. 2001. Influence of annual flooding on terrestrial arthropod assemblages of a Rio Grande riparian forest. Regul Rivers: Res Manag 17: 1–20. [Google Scholar]
  • England J, Skinner KS, Carter MG. 2008. Monitoring, river restoration and the water framework directive. Water Environ J 22: 227–234. [Google Scholar]
  • Englund G, Malmqvist B, Zhang Y. 1997. Using predictive models to estimate effects of flow regulation on net‐spinning caddis larvae in North Swedish rivers. Freshw Biol 37: 687–697. [Google Scholar]
  • Extence CA, Balbi DM, Chadd RP. 1999. River flow indexing using British benthic macroinvertebrates: a framework for setting hydroecological objectives. Regul Rivers: Res Manag 15: 545–574. [Google Scholar]
  • Feld CK, Birk S, Bradley DC, Hering D, Kail J, Marzin A, Melcher A, et al. 2011. From natural to degraded rivers and back again: a test of restoration ecology theory and practice. Adv Ecol Res 44: 119–209. [Google Scholar]
  • Feng J, Wang L, Li R, Li K, Pu X, Li Y. 2018. Operational regulation of a hydropower cascade based on the mitigation of the total dissolved gas supersaturation. Ecol Ind 92: 124–132. [Google Scholar]
  • Fièvet É. 2000. Passage facilities for diadromous freshwater shrimps (Decapoda: Caridea) in the Bananier River, Guadeloupe, West Indies. Regul Rivers: Res Manag 16: 101–112. [Google Scholar]
  • Fischer P, Öhl U. 2005. Effects of water-level fluctuations on the littoral benthic fish community in lakes: a mesocosm experiment. Behav Ecol 16: 741–746. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Frank HJ, Mather ME, Smith JM, Muth RM, Finn JT, McCormick SD. 2009. What is “fallback”?: metrics needed to assess telemetry tag effects on anadromous fish behavior. Hydrobiologia 635: 237–249. [Google Scholar]
  • Franklin P. 2014. Dissolved oxygen criteria for freshwater fish in New Zealand: A revised approach. New Zealand J Mar Freshw Res 48: 112–126. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Franssen NR, Tobler M. 2013. Upstream effects of a reservoir on fish assemblages 45 years following impoundment. J Fish Biol 82: 1659–1670. [Google Scholar]
  • French T, Chambers P. 1996. Habitat partitioning in riverine macrophyte communities. Freshw Biol 36: 509–520. [Google Scholar]
  • Fuentes-Pérez JF, Martínez-Miguel M, García-Vega A, Bravo-Córdoba FJ, Sanz-Ronda FJ. 2025. Design and initial validation of an infrared beam-break fish counter (‘Fish Tracker’) for fish passage monitoring. Sensors 25: 4112. [Google Scholar]
  • Führer S, Hayes DS, Hasler T, Graf DRM, Fauchery E, Mameri D, Schmutz S, et al. 2022. Stranding of larval nase (Chondrostoma nasus L.) depending on bank slope, down-ramping rate and daytime. Front Environ Sci 10: 966418. [Google Scholar]
  • Fukui D, Murakami M, Nakano S, Aoi T. 2006. Effect of emergent aquatic insects on bat foraging in a riparian forest. J Anim Ecol 75: 1252–1258. [Google Scholar]
  • Furey PC, Nordin RN, Mazumder A. 2006. Littoral benthic macroinvertebrates under contrasting drawdown in a reservoir and a natural lake. J North Am Benthol Soc 25: 19–31. [Google Scholar]
  • Gallacher S, Wilson D, Fairbrass A, Turmukhambetov D, Firman M, Kreitmayer S, Mac Aodha O, et al. 2021. Shazam for bats: Internet of Things for continuous real‐time biodiversity monitoring. IET Smart Cities 3: 171–183. [Google Scholar]
  • Gann GD, McDonald T, Walder B, Aronson J, Nelson CR, Jonson J, Hallett JG, et al. 2019. International principles and standards for the practice of ecological restoration. Second edition. Restor Ecol 27: S1– S46. [Google Scholar]
  • Garron C, Pangaud A, Taubaty M, Rolan-Meynard M, Argillier C, Raymond J-C., Dublon J, et al. 2024. Towards the development of a standardized method to monitor lakeshore hydromorphological restoration measures. Aquat Conserv: Mar Freshw Ecosyst 34: e4152. [Google Scholar]
  • Gerwing TG, Plate E. 2019. Effectiveness of nutrient enhancement as a remediation or compensation strategy of salmonid fisheries in culturally oligotrophic lakes and streams in temperate climates. Restor Ecol 27: 279–288. [Google Scholar]
  • Gibbins C, Vericat D, Batalla RJ. 2007. When is stream invertebrate drift catastrophic? The role of hydraulics and sediment transport in initiating drift during flood events. Freshw Biol 52: 2369–2384. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Gillooly JF, Charnov EL, West GB, Savage VM, Brown JH. 2002. Effects of size and temperature on developmental time. Nature 417: 70–73. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Gillette DP, Daniel K, Redd C. 2016. Fish and Benthic Macroinvertebrate Assemblage Response to Removal of a Partially Breached Lowhead Dam. River Res Appl 32: 1776–1789. [Google Scholar]
  • Glover B, Brabrand Å, Brittain J, Gregersen F, Holmen J, Saltveit SJ. 2012. Avbøtende tiltak i regulerte vassdrag. NVE. http://hdl.handle.net/11250/2500839 [Google Scholar]
  • Golpour A, Šmejkal M, Čech M, dos Santos RA, Souza AT, Jůza T, Martínez C, et al. 2022. Similarities and differences in fish community composition accessed by electrofishing, gill netting, seining, trawling, and water eDNA metabarcoding in temperate reservoirs. Front Ecol Evol 10: 913279. [Google Scholar]
  • Göthe E, Degerman E, Sandin L, Segersten J, Tamario C, McKie BG. 2019. Flow restoration and the impacts of multiple stressors on fish communities in regulated rivers. J Appl Ecol 56: 1687–1702. [Google Scholar]
  • Gowans A, Armstrong J, Priede I. 1999. Movements of adult Atlantic salmon in relation to a hydroelectric dam and fish ladder. J Fish Biol 54: 713–726. [Google Scholar]
  • Gowans A, Armstrong J, Priede I, Mckelvey S. 2003. Movements of Atlantic salmon migrating upstream through a fish‐pass complex in Scotland. Ecol Freshw Fish 12: 177–189. [Google Scholar]
  • Gozlan RE, Britton JR, Cowx I, Copp GH. 2010. Current knowledge on non‐native freshwater fish introductions. J Fish Biol 76: 751–786. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Graf WL. 2006. Downstream hydrologic and geomorphic effects of large dams on American rivers. Geomorphology 79: 336–360. [Google Scholar]
  • Greenwood JJD. 2007. Citizens, science and bird conservation. J Ornithol 148: 77–124. 4. [Google Scholar]
  • Grimås U. 1965. Inlet impoundments. An attempt to preserve littoral animals in regulated subarctic lakes. Rep Inst Freshw Res 22–30. [Google Scholar]
  • Guedes GHS, Araújo FG. 2022. Underwater drones reveal different fish community structures on the steep slopes of a tropical reservoir. Hydrobiologia 849: 1301–1312. [Google Scholar]
  • Haas TC, Blum MJ, Heins DC. 2010. Morphological responses of a stream fish to water impoundment. Biol Lett 6: 803–806. [Google Scholar]
  • Haas C, Thumser PK, Hellmair M, Pilger TJ, Schletterer M. 2024. Monitoring of fish migration in fishways and rivers—the infrared fish counter “Riverwatcher” as a suitable tool for long-term monitoring. Water 16: 477. [Google Scholar]
  • Hagelin A, Calles O, Greenberg L, Nyqvist D, Bergman E. 2016. The migratory behaviour and fallback rate of landlocked atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in a regulated river: does timing matter? River Res Appl 32: 1402–1409. [Google Scholar]
  • Hagelin A, Museth J, Greenberg LA, Kraabøl M, Calles O, Bergman E. 2019. Upstream fishway performance by Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and brown trout (Salmo trutta) spawners at complex hydropower dams-is prior experience a success criterion? Can J Fish Aquat Sci 78: 124–134. [Google Scholar]
  • Hancock PJ. 2002. Human impacts on the stream-groundwater exchange zone. Environ Manag 29: 763–781. [Google Scholar]
  • Harbicht AB, Watz J, Nyqvist D, Virmaja T, Carlsson N, Aldvén D, Nilsson PA, et al. 2022. Guiding migrating salmonid smolts: Experimentally assessing the performance of angled and inclined screens with varying gap widths. Ecol Eng 174: 106438. [Google Scholar]
  • Harby A, Noack M. 2013. Rapid flow fluctuations and impacts on fish and the aquatic ecosystem. In: Ecohydraulics. John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., pp. 323–335. [Google Scholar]
  • Hawkins CP, Olson JR, Hill RA. 2010. The reference condition: predicting benchmarks for ecological and water-quality assessments. J North Am Benthol Soc 29: 312–343. [Google Scholar]
  • He F, Zarfl C, Tockner K, Olden JD, Campos Z, Muniz F, Svenning J-C, et al. 2024. Hydropower impacts on riverine biodiversity. Nat Rev Earth Environ 5: 755–772. [Google Scholar]
  • Hedger R, Gosselin M-P., Larsen BM. 2023. Testing UAV surveying for mapping freshwater pearl mussel populations. Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA). https://brage.nina.no/nina-xmlui/handle/11250/3100096 [Google Scholar]
  • Heggberget TG. 1984. Effect of supersaturated water on fish in the River Nidelva, southern Norway. J Fish Biol 24: 65–74. [Google Scholar]
  • Heggenes J. 1988. Effects of short-term flow fluctuations on displacement of, and habitat use by, brown trout in a small stream. Trans Am Fish Soc 117: 336–344. [Google Scholar]
  • Heggenes J, Stickler M, Alfredsen K, Brittain JE, Adeva‐Bustos A, Huusko A. 2021. Hydropower‐driven thermal changes, biological responses and mitigating measures in northern river systems. River Res Appl 37: 743–765. [Google Scholar]
  • Helland IP, Johnsen SI, Eloranta AP. 2019. Towards environmental design in hydropower reservoirs − Developing a handbook for mitigation measures in regulated lakes. Norwegian Res Centre Hydropower Technol. https://ntnuopen.ntnu.no/ntnu-xmlui/handle/11250/2631787 (Accessed 28 May 2024). [Google Scholar]
  • Hellsten S, Marttunen M, Visuri M, Keto A, Partanen S, Jarvinen EA. 2002. Indicators of sustainable water level regulation in northern river basins: A case study from the River Paatsjoki water system in northern Lapland. Archiv für Hydrobiologie (Supplementband) 141: 353–370. [Google Scholar]
  • Hellsten S, Mjelde M. 2009. Macrophyte responses to water level fluctuation in Fennoscandinavian Lakes — Applying a common index. Internationale Vereinigung für theoretische und angewandte Limnologie: Verhandlungen 30: 765–769. [Google Scholar]
  • Henschel JR, Mahsberg D, Stumpf H. 2001. Allochthonous aquatic insects increase predation and decrease herbivory in river shore food webs. Oikos 93: 429–438. [Google Scholar]
  • Hering D, Borja A, Jones JI, Pont D, Boets P, Bouchez A, Bruce K, et al. 2018. Implementation options for DNA-based identification into ecological status assessment under the European Water Framework Directive. Water Res 138: 192–205. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Herrera‐R GA, Heilpern SA, Couto TBA, Victoria‐Lacy L, Duponchelle F, Correa SB, Farah‐Pérez A, et al. 2024. A synthesis of the diversity of freshwater fish migrations in the Amazon basin. Fish Fisheries 25: 114–133. [Google Scholar]
  • Hess JE, Paradis RL, Moser ML, Weitkamp LA, Delomas TA, Narum SR. 2021. Robust recolonization of Pacific lamprey following dam removals. Trans Am Fish Soc 150: 56–74. [Google Scholar]
  • Hill NM, Keddy PA, Wisheu IC. 1998. A hydrological model for predicting the effects of dams on the shoreline vegetation of lakes and reservoirs. Environ Manag 22: 723–736. [Google Scholar]
  • Hirsch PE, Eloranta AP, Amundsen P-A., Brabrand Å, Charmasson J, Helland IP, Power M, et al. 2017. Effects of water level regulation in alpine hydropower reservoirs: an ecosystem perspective with a special emphasis on fish. Hydrobiologia 794: 287–301. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Hitt NP, Eyler S, Wofford JEB. 2012. Dam removal increases american eel abundance in distant headwater streams. Trans Am Fish Soc 141: 1171–1179. [Google Scholar]
  • Hogg RS, Coghlan SM, Zydlewski J, Gardner C. 2015. Fish community response to a small‐stream dam removal in a maine coastal river tributary. Trans Am Fish Soc 144: 467–479. [Google Scholar]
  • Holt CR, Pfitzer D, Scalley C, Caldwell BA, Batzer DP. 2015. Macroinvertebrate community responses to annual flow variation from river regulation: an 11-year study. River Res Appl 31: 798–807. [Google Scholar]
  • Hooker J, Foxley T, Stone Emma L, Lintott Paul R. 2024. Re-establishing historic ecosystem links through targeted species reintroduction: beaver-mediated wetlands support increased bat activity. Sci Total Environ 951: 175661. [Google Scholar]
  • Huey RB, Kingsolver JG. 1989. Evolution of thermal sensitivity of ectotherm performance. Trends Ecol Evol 4: 131–135. [Google Scholar]
  • Hynes HBN. 1975. The stream and its valley: With 4 figures and 2 tables in the text. Internationale Vereinigung für theoretische und angewandte Limnologie: Verhandlungen 19: 1–15. [Google Scholar]
  • IEA. 2024. Renewables − analysis and forecast to 2030. Paris, France: International Energy Agency. [Google Scholar]
  • Iwata T, Nakano S, Murakami M. 2003. Stream meanders increase insectivorous bird abundance in riparian deciduous forests. Ecography 26: 325–337. [Google Scholar]
  • Jähnig SC, Lorenz AW, Hering D, Antons C, Sundermann A, Jedicke E, Haase P. 2011. River restoration success: a question of perception. Ecol Appl 21: 2007–2015. [Google Scholar]
  • Janáč M, Jurajda P, Kružíková L, Roche K, Prášek V. 2013. Reservoir to river passage of age-0+ year fishes, indication of a dispersion pathway for a non-native species: reservoir to river passage of age-0+ year fishes. J Fish Biol 82: 994–1010. [Google Scholar]
  • Jansen W, Kappus B, Böhmer J, Beiter T. 1999. Fish communities and migrations in the vicinity of fishways in a regulated river (Enz, Baden-Württemberg, Germany). Limnologica 29: 425–435. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Jansson R, Nilsson C, Dynesius M, Andersson E. 2000. Effects of river regulation on river-margin vegetation: a comparison of eight boreal rivers. Ecol Appl 10: 203–224. [Google Scholar]
  • Johansson ME, Nilsson C. 2002. Responses of riparian plants to flooding in free- flowing and regulated boreal rivers: an experimental study. J Appl Ecol 39: 971–986. [Google Scholar]
  • Johnson R, Drakare S, Kahlert M, Carlson P. 2025. Quantifying small hydropower dam effects on habitats and multiple organism groups in forested lowland rivers. Inland Waters: 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/20442041.2024.2448915 [Google Scholar]
  • Jones G, Jacobs DS, Kunz TH, Willig MR, Racey PA. 2009. Carpe noctem: the importance of bats as bioindicators. Endanger Species Res 8: 93–115. [Google Scholar]
  • Jones NE. 2013. Spatial patterns of benthic invertebrates in regulated and natural rivers. River Res Appl 29: 343–351. [Google Scholar]
  • Jones PE, Champneys T, Vevers J, Börger L, Svendsen JC, Consuegra S, Jones J, et al. 2021. Selective effects of small barriers on river‐resident fish. J Appl Ecol 58: 1487–1498. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Jonsson B, Waples R, Friedland K. 1999. Extinction considerations for diadromous fishes. ICES J Mar Sci 56: 405–409. [Google Scholar]
  • Jonsson M, Deleu P, Malmqvist B. 2013. Persisting effects of river regulation on emergent aquatic insects and terrestrial invertebrates in upland forests. River Res Appl 29: 537–547. [Google Scholar]
  • Junk WJ, Bayley PB, Sparks RE. 1989. The flood pulse concept in river-floodplain systems. Can Spec Publ Fish Aquat Sci 106: 110–127. [Google Scholar]
  • Karlsson R, Leonardsson K. 2014. Uppföljning av miljöförbättrande åtgärder i vattendrag. Rapport (Sveriges lantbruksuniversitet, Institutionen för vilt, fisk och miljö). https://pub.epsilon.slu.se/id/eprint/11630/contents (Accessed 16 January 2025). [Google Scholar]
  • Katopodis C, Williams JG. 2012. The development of fish passage research in a historical context. Ecol Eng 48: 8–18. [Google Scholar]
  • Katopodis C, Cai L, Johnson D. 2019. Sturgeon survival: the role of swimming performance and fish passage research. Fish Res 212: 162–171. [Google Scholar]
  • Kawaguchi Y, Nakano S. 2001. Contribution of terrestrial invertebrates to the annual resource budget for salmonids in forest and grassland reaches of a headwater stream. Freshw Biol 46: 303–316. [Google Scholar]
  • Keefer ML, Jepson MA, Clabough TS, Caudill CC. 2021. Technical fishway passage structures provide high passage efficiency and effective passage for adult Pacific salmonids at eight large dams. PLOS One 16: e0256805. [Google Scholar]
  • Kennedy TA, Yackulic CB, Cross WF, Grams PE, Yard MD, Copp AJ. 2014. The relation between invertebrate drift and two primary controls, discharge and benthic densities, in a large regulated river. Freshw Biol 59: 557–572. [Google Scholar]
  • Kennedy TA, Muehlbauer JD, Yackulic CB, Lytle DA, Miller SW, Dibble KL, Kortenhoeven EW, et al. 2016. Flow management for hydropower extirpates aquatic insects, undermining river food webs. BioScience 66: 561–575. [Google Scholar]
  • Kerr JR, Vowles AS, Crabb MC, Kemp PS. 2021. Selective fish passage: Restoring habitat connectivity without facilitating the spread of a non-native species. J Environ Manag 279: 110908. [Google Scholar]
  • Keto A, Tarvainen A, Hellsten S. 2006. The effect of water level regulation on species richness and abundance of aquatic macrophytes in Finnish lakes. SIL Proceedings, 1922–2010, 29: 2103–2108. [Google Scholar]
  • Keto A, Tarvainen A, Marttunen M, Hellsten S. 2008. Use of the water-level fluctuation analysis tool (Regcel) in hydrological status assessment of Finnish lakes. Hydrobiologia 613: 133–142. [Google Scholar]
  • Kiernan JD, Moyle PB, Crain PK. 2012. Restoring native fish assemblages to a regulated California stream using the natural flow regime concept. Ecol Appl 22: 1472–1482. [Google Scholar]
  • King J, Cambray JA, Dean Impson N. 1998. Linked effects of dam-released floods and water temperature on spawning of the Clanwilliam yellowfish Barbus capensis. Hydrobiologia 384: 245–265. [Google Scholar]
  • Kingsford RT, Auld KM. 2005. Waterbird breeding and environmental flow management in the Macquarie Marshes, arid Australia. River Res Appl 21: 187–200. [Google Scholar]
  • Kislik C, Genzoli L, Lyons A, Kelly M. 2020. Application of UAV imagery to detect and quantify submerged filamentous algae and rooted macrophytes in a non-wadeable river. Remote Sense 12: 3332. [Google Scholar]
  • Klobucar SL, Budy P. 2016. Consequences of seasonal variation in reservoir water level for predatory fishes: linking visual foraging and prey densities. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 73: 53–64. [Google Scholar]
  • Knott J, Pander J. 2023. Downstream fish passage at small-scale hydropower plants: turbine or bypass? Front Environ Sci 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fenvs.2023.1168473 [Google Scholar]
  • Knott J, Mueller M, Pander J, Geist J. 2024. Habitat quality and biological community responses to innovative hydropower plant installations at transverse in‐stream structures. J Appl Ecol 61: 606–620. [Google Scholar]
  • Konrad CP, Olden JD, Lytle DA, Melis TS, Schmidt JC, Bray EN, Freeman MC, Gido KB, Hemphill NP, Kennard MJ, McMullen LE, Mims MC, Pyron M, Robinson CT, Williams JG. 2011. Large-scale flow experiments for managing river systems. BioScience 61: 948–959. [Google Scholar]
  • Krajenbrink HJ, Acreman M, Dunbar MJ, Hannah DM, Laize CL, Wood PJ. 2019. Macroinvertebrate community responses to river impoundment at multiple spatial scales. Sci Total Environ 650: 2648–2656. [Google Scholar]
  • Kraus JM. 2010. Diet shift of lentic dragonfly larvae in response to reduced terrestrial prey subsidies. J North Am Benthol Soc 29: 602–613. [Google Scholar]
  • Kupferberg SJ, Palen WJ, Lind AJ, Bobzien S, Catenazzi A, Drennan J, Power ME. 2012. Effects of flow regimes altered by dams on survival, population declines, and range‐wide losses of California river‐breeding frogs. Conserv Biol 26: 513–524. [Google Scholar]
  • Lafage D, Bergman E, Eckstein RL, Österling EM, Sadler JP, Piccolo JJ. 2019. Local and landscape drivers of aquatic-to-terrestrial subsidies in riparian ecosystems: A worldwide meta-analysis. Ecosphere 10: e02697. [Google Scholar]
  • Larinier M, Travade F, Porcher J-P. 2002. Fishways: biological basis, design criteria and monitoring. Bulletin Français de la Pêche et de la Pisciculture: 208. https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2002110 [Google Scholar]
  • Layzer JB, Gordon ME, Anderson RM. 1993. Mussels: The forgotten fauna of regulated rivers. a case study of the Caney Fork River. Regulat Rivers: Res Manag 8: 63–71. [Google Scholar]
  • Leandro C, Jay-Robert P, Pétillon J. 2024. eDNA for monitoring and conserving terrestrial arthropods: Insights from a systematic map and barcode repositories assessments. Insect Conserv Diver 17: 565–578. [Google Scholar]
  • Lehner B, Liermann CR, Revenga C, Vörösmarty C, Fekete B, Crouzet P, Döll P, et al. 2011. High-resolution mapping of the world's reservoirs and dams for sustainable river-flow management. Front Ecol Environ 9: 494–502. [Google Scholar]
  • Leira M, Cantonati M. 2008. Effects of water-level fluctuations on lakes: an annotated bibliography. Hydrobiologia 613: 171–184. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Leite R, Boavida I, Costa MJ, Godinho F, Pinheiro A, Santos J. 2025. Overlap evidence in fish microhabitat use in low-order rivers affected by small hydropower plants. Ecohydrol Hydrobiol 100683 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecohyd.2025.100683 [Google Scholar]
  • Lenders H, Chamuleau T, Hendriks A, Lauwerier R, Leuven R, Verberk W. 2016. Historical rise of waterpower initiated the collapse of salmon stocks. Sci Rep 6: 29269. [Google Scholar]
  • Lessard JL, Hayes DB. 2003. Effects of elevated water temperature on fish and macroinvertebrate communities below small dams. River Res Appl 19: 721–732. [Google Scholar]
  • Li J, Hatton-Ellis TW, Lawson Handley L-J., Kimbell HS, Benucci M, Peirson G, Hänfling B. 2019. Ground-truthing of a fish-based environmental DNA metabarcoding method for assessing the quality of lakes. J Appl Ecol 56: 1232–1244. [Google Scholar]
  • Li P, Zhu DZ, Li R, Wang Y, Crossman JA, Kuhn WL. 2022. Production of total dissolved gas supersaturation at hydropower facilities and its transport: a review. Water Res 223: 119012. [Google Scholar]
  • Liermann M, Pess G, McHenry M, McMillan J, Elofson M, Bennett T, Moses R. 2017. Relocation and recolonization of coho salmon in two tributaries to the Elwha River: implications for management and monitoring. Trans Am Fish Soc 146: 955–966. [Google Scholar]
  • Liew JH, Tan HH, Yeo DCJ. 2016. Dammed rivers: impoundments facilitate fish invasions. Freshw Biol 61: 1421–1429. [Google Scholar]
  • Lind PR, Robson BJ, Mitchell BD. 2007. Multiple lines of evidence for the beneficial effects of environmental flows in two lowland rivers in Victoria, Australia. River Res Appl 23: 933–946. [Google Scholar]
  • Lindström A, Ruud A. 2017. Whose hydropower? From conflictual management into an era of reconciling environmental concerns; a retake of hydropower governance towards win-win solutions? Sustainability 9: 1262. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Linløkken AN, Sandlund OT. 2016. Recruitment of sympatric vendace (Coregonus albula) and whitefish (C. lavaretus) is affected by different environmental factors. Ecol Freshw Fish 25: 652–663. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Löhmus M, Björklund M. 2015. Climate change: What will it do to fish—parasite interactions? Biol J Linnean Soc 116: 397–411. [Google Scholar]
  • Loire R, Piégay H, Malavoi J-R., Kondolf GM, Bêche LA. 2021. From flushing flows to (eco)morphogenic releases: evolving terminology, practice, and integration into river management. Earth-Sci Rev 213: 103475. [Google Scholar]
  • Logez M, Roy R, Tissot L, Argillier C. 2016. Effects of water-level fluctuations on the environmental characteristics and fish-environment relationships in the littoral zone of a reservoir. Fund Appl Limnol 189: 37–49. [Google Scholar]
  • Lucas MC, Baras E, Thom TJ, Duncan A, Slavík O. 2001. Migration of freshwater fishes. Wiley Online Library. [Google Scholar]
  • Lundqvist H, Rivinoja P, Leonardsson K, McKinnell S. 2008. Upstream passage problems for wild Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) in a regulated river and its effect on the population. Hydrobiologia 602: 111–127. [Google Scholar]
  • Mahoney JM, Rood SB. 1998. Streamflow requirements for cottonwood seedling recruitment—an integrative model. Wetlands 18: 634–645. [Google Scholar]
  • Malm Renöfält B, Ahonen J. 2013. Ekologiska flöden och ekologiskt anpassad vattenreglering: Underlag till vägledning om lämpliga försiktighetsmått och bästa möjliga teknik för vattenkraft. Havs-och vattenmyndigheten. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:1366185 [Google Scholar]
  • Malm Renöfält B, Jansson R, Ahonen J. 2015. Ekologisk återställning i helt eller delvis torrlagda fåror i anslutning till vattenkraftverk. Havs-och vattenmyndigheten. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:1367733 [Google Scholar]
  • Malm Renöfält B, Jansson R. 2023. ECOPEAK − Högflödespulser för att upprätthålla naturvärden i Natura 2000- områden i reglerade vatten. Slutrapport. Energimyndigheten. [Google Scholar]
  • Marschall EA, Mather ME, Parrish DL, Allison GW, McMenemy JR. 2011. Migration delays caused by anthropogenic barriers: modeling dams, temperature, and success of migrating salmon smolts. Ecol Appl 21: 3014–3031. [Google Scholar]
  • Marttila M, Louhi P, Huusko A, Mäki‐Petäys A, Yrjänä T, Muotka T. 2016. Long‐term performance of in‐stream restoration measures in boreal streams. Ecohydrology 9: 280–289. [Google Scholar]
  • Mason CF, Macdonald SM. 1982. The input of terrestrial invertebrates from tree canopies to a stream. Freshw Biol 12: 305–311. [Google Scholar]
  • Masouras A, Karaouzas I, Dimitriou E, Tsirtsis G, Smeti E. 2021. Benthic diatoms in river biomonitoring—present and future perspectives within the Water Framework Directive. Water 13: 478. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Mathers KL, Robinson CT, Weber C. 2021. Artificial flood reduces fine sediment clogging enhancing hyporheic zone physicochemistry and accessibility for macroinvertebrates. Ecol Solut Evid 2: e12103. [Google Scholar]
  • McCabe CL, Matthaei CD, Tonkin JD. 2025. The ecological benefits of more room for rivers. Nat Water: 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1038/s44221-025-00403-0 [Google Scholar]
  • McIntyre PB, Liermann CR, Childress E, Hamann EJ, Hogan JD, Januchowski-Hartley SR, Koning AA, et al. 2015. Conservation of migratory fishes in freshwater ecosystems. In: Conservation of Freshwater Fishes. UK: Cambridge University Press Cambridge. http://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139627085.012 [Google Scholar]
  • Mihalicz JE, Jardine TD, Baulch HM, Phillips ID. 2019. Seasonal effects of a hydropeaking dam on a downstream benthic macroinvertebrate community. River Res Appl 35: 714–724. [Google Scholar]
  • Mijangos JL, Bino G, Hawke T, Kolomyjec SH, Kingsford RT, Sidhu H, Grant T, et al. 2022. Fragmentation by major dams and implications for the future viability of platypus populations. Commun Biol 5: 1–9. [Google Scholar]
  • Milbrink G, Vrede T, Tranvik LJ, Rydin E. 2011. Large-scale and long-term decrease in fish growth following the construction of hydroelectric reservoirs. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 68: 2167–2173. [Google Scholar]
  • Miler O, Porst G, McGoff E, Pilotto F, Donohue L, Jurca T, Solimini A, et al. 2013. Morphological alterations of lake shores in Europe: a multimetric ecological assessment approach using benthic macroinvertebrates. Ecol Ind 34: 398–410. [Google Scholar]
  • Miles NG, West RJ. 2011. The use of an aeration system to prevent thermal stratification of a freshwater impoundment and its effect on downstream fish assemblages. J Fish Biol 78: 945–952. [Google Scholar]
  • Mims MC, Olden JD. 2013. Fish assemblages respond to altered flow regimes via ecological filtering of life history strategies. Freshw Biol 58: 50–62. [Google Scholar]
  • Mjelde M, Hellsten S, Ecke F. 2013. A water level drawdown index for aquatic macrophytes in Nordic lakes. Hydrobiologia 704: 141–151. [Google Scholar]
  • Modde T, Jeric RJ, Hubert WA, Gipson RD. 1997. Estimating the impacts of reservoir elevation changes on kokanee emergence in Flaming Gorge Reservoir, Wyoming-Utah. North Am J Fish Manag 17: 470–473. [Google Scholar]
  • Montgomery DR. 2004. King of fish: the thousand-year run of salmon. Cambridge, MA, USA: Basic Books. [Google Scholar]
  • Moody KN, Gardner ST, Sundt-Hansen LE, Fossøy F, McCoskey DN, Morrice KJ, Pracheil BM. 2025. Environmental DNA as a tool for hydropower impact assessments: Current status, special considerations, and future integration. Biol Rev, n/a(n/a). https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.70059 [Google Scholar]
  • Morais P, Daverat F. 2016. An Introduction to fish migration. London, UK: CRC Press. [Google Scholar]
  • Moran EF, Lopez MC, Moore N, Müller N, Hyndman DW. 2018. Sustainable hydropower in the 21st century. Proc Natl Acad Sci 115: 11891–11898. [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • Moreira M, Hayes DS, Boavida I, Schletterer M, Schmutz S, Pinheiro A. 2019. Ecologically-based criteria for hydropeaking mitigation: a review. Sci Total Environ 657: 1508–1522. [Google Scholar]
  • Mueller M, Pander J, Geist J. 2017. Evaluation of external fish injury caused by hydropower plants based on a novel field-based protocol. Fish Manag Ecol 24: 240–255. [Google Scholar]
  • Nagrodski A, Raby GD, Hasler CT, Taylor MK, Cooke SJ. 2012. Fish stranding in freshwater systems: sources, consequences, and mitigation. J Environ Manag 103: 133–141. [Google Scholar]
  • Nakano S, Murakami M. 2001. Reciprocal subsidies: Dynamic interdependence between terrestrial and aquatic food webs. Proc Natl Acad Sci 98: 166–170. [Google Scholar]
  • Näslund J, Wickström H, Degerman E, Sundin J. 2022. Negative influence of a threatened species on ecological status classification: A case study of the influence of European eel within the Swedish fish index VIX. Ecol Ind 144: 109537. [Google Scholar]
  • Näslund J, Staveley TAB, Petersson E. 2024. Standardized intermittent shoreline boat electrofishing for slow-flowing rivers in Sweden. MethodsX 13: 102907. [Google Scholar]
  • Naughton GP, Caudill CC, Keefer ML, Bjornn TC, Peery CA, Stuehrenberg LC. 2006. Fallback by adult sockeye salmon at Columbia River dams. North Am J Fish Manag 26: 380–390. [Google Scholar]
  • Nieminen E, Hyytiäinen K, Lindroos M. 2016. Economic and policy considerations regarding hydropower and migratory fish. Fish Fisheries 1: 54–78. [Google Scholar]
  • Nilsson C, Keddy PA. 1988. Predictability of change in shoreline vegetation in a hydroelectric reservoir, northern Sweden. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 45: 1896–1904. [Google Scholar]
  • Nilsson C, Ekblad A, Gardfjell M, Carlberg B. 1991. Long-term effects of river regulation on river margin vegetation. J Appl Ecol: 963–987. https://doi.org/10.2307/2404220 [Google Scholar]
  • Nilsson C, Jansson R. 1995. Floristic differences between riparian corridors of regulated and free-flowing boreal rivers. Regulat Rivers: Res Manag 11: 55–66. [Google Scholar]
  • Nilsson C, Svedmark M. 2002. Basic principles and ecological consequences of changing water regimes: riparian plant communities. Environ Manag 30: 468–480. [Google Scholar]
  • Nilsson C, Reidy CA, Dynesius M, Revenga C. 2005. Fragmentation and flow regulation of the world's large river systems. Science 308: 405–408. [Google Scholar]
  • Nilsson C, Brown RL, Jansson R, Merritt DM. 2010. The role of hydrochory in structuring riparian and wetland vegetation. Biol Rev 85: 837–858. [Google Scholar]
  • Noonan MJ, Grant JW, Jackson CD. 2012. A quantitative assessment of fish passage efficiency. Fish Fisheries 13: 450–464. [Google Scholar]
  • Nordström E, Lind L, Eckstein RL, Malm-Renöfält B, Bergman E, Jansson R, Greenberg L, Watz J. 2025. Effect of hydropeaking on decomposition in riparian zones. River Res Appl (Early online). https://doi.org/10.1002/rra.70031 [Google Scholar]
  • Norrgård JR, Nyqvist D, Greenberg L, Bergman E. 2024. Downstream migration of landlocked Atlantic salmon smolt in a regulated river—effects of multiple passage at dams with programmed spill. River Res Appl 40: 821–833. [Google Scholar]
  • Nyqvist D, Calles O, Bergman E, Hagelin A, Greenberg LA. 2016a. Post-spawning survival and downstream passage of landlocked Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) in a regulated river: is there potential for repeat spawning? River Res Appl 32: 1008–1017. [Google Scholar]
  • Nyqvist D, Greenberg LA, Goerig E, Calles O, Bergman E, Ardren WR, Castro‐Santos T. 2016b. Migratory delay leads to reduced passage success of Atlantic salmon smolts at a hydroelectric dam. Ecol Freshw Fish 26: 707–718. [Google Scholar]
  • Nyqvist D, Nilsson PA, Alenäs I, Elghagen J, Hebrand M, Karlsson S, Kläppe S, et al. 2017a. Upstream and downstream passage of migrating adult Atlantic salmon: Remedial measures improve passage performance at a hydropower dam. Ecol Eng 102: 331–343. [Google Scholar]
  • Olden JD, Naiman R.J. 2010. Incorporating thermal regimes into environmental flows assessments: modifying dam operations to restore freshwater ecosystem integrity. Freshw Biol 55: 86–107. [Google Scholar]
  • Olden JD, Konrad CP, Melis TS, Kennard MJ, Freeman MC, Mims MC, Bray EN, et al. 2014. Are large‐scale flow experiments informing the science and management of freshwater ecosystems? Front Ecol Environ 12: 176–185. [Google Scholar]
  • O'Neal JS, Roni P, Crawford B, Ritchie A, Shelly A. 2016. Comparing stream restoration project effectiveness using a programmatic evaluation of salmonid habitat and fish response. North Am J Fish Manag 36: 681–703. [Google Scholar]
  • Opperman JJ, Luster R, McKenney BA, Roberts M, Meadows AW. 2010. Ecologically functional floodplains: connectivity, flow regime, and scale. J Am Water Resour Assoc 46: 211–226. [Google Scholar]
  • Paetzold A, Bernet JF, Tockner K. 2006. Consumer‐specific responses to riverine subsidy pulses in a riparian arthropod assemblage. Freshw Biol 51: 1103–1115. [Google Scholar]
  • Pander J, Casas‐Mulet R, Geist J. 2023. Hydropeaking impairs upstream salmonid spawning habitats in a restored Danube tributary. River Res Appl 39: 389–400. [Google Scholar]
  • Pelicice FM, Agostinho AA. 2008. Fish-passage facilities as ecological traps in large neotropical rivers. Conserv Biol 22: 180–188. [Google Scholar]
  • Peterson ML, Fuller AN, Demko D. 2017. Environmental Factors Associated with the Upstream Migration of Fall-Run Chinook Salmon in a Regulated River. N Am J Fish Manag 37: 78–93. [Google Scholar]
  • Poff NL, Allan JD, Bain MB, Karr JR, Prestegaard KL, Richter BD, Sparks RE, et al. 1997. The natural flow regime. BioScience 47: 769–784. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Poff NL, Zimmerman JKH. 2010. Ecological responses to altered flow regimes: a literature review to inform the science and management of environmental flows. Freshw Biol 55: 194–205. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Poikane S, Zohary T, Cantonati M. 2020. Assessing the ecological effects of hydromorphological pressures on European lakes. Inland Waters 10: 241–255. [Google Scholar]
  • Pont D, Rocle M, Valentini A, Civade R, Jean P, Maire A, Roset N, et al. 2018. Environmental DNA reveals quantitative patterns of fish biodiversity in large rivers despite its downstream transportation. Sci Rep 8: 10361. [Google Scholar]
  • Pont D, Valentini A, Rocle M, Maire A, Delaigue O, Jean P, Dejean T. 2021. The future of fish-based ecological assessment of European rivers: from traditional EU Water Framework Directive compliant methods to eDNA metabarcoding-based approaches. J Fish Biol 98: 354–366. [Google Scholar]
  • Poole GC, Berman CH. 2001. An ecological perspective on in-stream temperature: natural heat dynamics and mechanisms of human-caused thermal degradation. Environ Manag 27: 787–802. [Google Scholar]
  • Prchalova M, Kubečka J, Říha M, Mrkvička T, Vašek M, Jůza T, Křížek J. 2009. Size selectivity of standardized multimesh gillnets in sampling coarse European species. Fish Res 96: 51–57. [Google Scholar]
  • Puffer M, Berg OK, Huusko A, Vehanen T, Forseth T, Einum S. 2015. Seasonal effects of hydropeaking on growth, energetics and movement of juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar). River Res Appl 31: 1101–1108. [Google Scholar]
  • Pulg U, Vollset KW, Velle G, Stranzl S. 2016. First observations of saturopeaking: characteristics and implications. Sci Total Environ 573: 1615–1621. [Google Scholar]
  • Pulg U, Isaksen TE, Velle G, Vollset K, Stranzl S, Espedal EO, Bye-Ingebrigtsen E, et al. 2018. Gassovermetning i vassdrag-en kunnskapsoppsummering. LFI-Laboratorium for ferskvannsøkologi og innlandsfiske. NORCE Miljø. https://norceresearch.brage.unit.no/norceresearch-xmlui/handle/11250/2626856 [Google Scholar]
  • Randklev CR, Ford N, Wolverton S, Kennedy JH, Robertson C, Mayes K, Ford D. 2016. The influence of stream discontinuity and life history strategy on mussel community structure: a case study from the Sabine River, Texas. Hydrobiologia 770: 173–191. [Google Scholar]
  • Reindl R, Neuner J, Schletterer M. 2023. Increased hydropower production and hydropeaking mitigation along the Upper Inn River (Tyrol, Austria) with a combination of buffer reservoirs, diversion hydropower plants and retention basins. River Res Appl 39: 602–609. [Google Scholar]
  • Renöfält BM, Jansson R, Nilsson C. 2010. Effects of hydropower generation and opportunities for environmental flow management in Swedish riverine ecosystems. Freshw Biol 55: 49–67. [Google Scholar]
  • Renöfält BM, Widén Å, Jansson R, Degerman E. 2017. Identifiering av påverkan, åtgärder och åtgärdspotential i vattendrag påverkade av vattenkraft. Energiforsk Rapport 2017: 429. [Google Scholar]
  • Richter B, Baumgartner J, Wigington R, Braun D. 1997. How much water does a river need? Freshw Biol 37: 231–249. [Google Scholar]
  • Richter BD, Baumgartner JV, Powell J, Braun DP. 1996. A method for assessing hydrologic alteration within ecosystems. Conserv Biol 10: 1163–1174. [Google Scholar]
  • Richter BD, Warner AT, Meyer JL, Lutz K. 2006. A collaborative and adaptive process for developing environmental flow recommendations. River Res Appl 22: 297–318. [Google Scholar]
  • Rimet F, Bouchez A. 2012. Biomonitoring river diatoms: Implications of taxonomic resolution. Ecol Ind 15: 92–99. [Google Scholar]
  • Ritterbusch D, Blabolil P, Breine J, Erős T, Mehner T, Olin M, Peirson G, et al. 2022. European fish-based assessment reveals high diversity of systems for determining ecological status of lakes. Sci Total Environ 802: 149620. [Google Scholar]
  • Robinson CT, Aebischer S, Uehlinger U. 2004. Immediate and habitat-specific responses of macroinvertebrates to sequential, experimental floods. J North Am Benthol Soc 23: 853–867. [Google Scholar]
  • Rock SL, Nilsson A, Watz J, Calles O, Österling M. 2025. Parasitic mussels induce upstream movement in their fish hosts: early evidence of extended phenotype. Behav Ecol: araf043. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/araf043 [Google Scholar]
  • Rodríguez-González PM, Abraham E, Aguiar F, Andreoli A, Baležentienė L, Berisha N, Bernez I, et al. 2022. Bringing the margin to the focus: 10 challenges for riparian vegetation science and management. WIREs Water 9: e1604. [Google Scholar]
  • Rogosch JS, Boehm HIA, Tingley RW, Wright KD, Webb EB, Paukert C.P. 2024. Evaluating effectiveness of restoration to address current stressors to riverine fish. Freshw Biol 69: 607–622. [Google Scholar]
  • Roni P, Åberg U, Weber C. 2018. A review of approaches for monitoring the effectiveness of regional river habitat restoration programs. North Am J Fish Manag 38: 1170–1186. [Google Scholar]
  • Rood SB, Samuelson GM, Braatne JH, Gourley CR, Hughes FM, Mahoney JM. 2005. Managing river flows to restore floodplain forests. Front Ecol Environ 3: 193–201. [Google Scholar]
  • Rørslett B, Mjelde M, Johansen SW. 1989. Effects of hydropower development on aquatic macrophytes in Norwegian rivers: Present state of knowledge and some case studies. Regulat Rivers: Res Manag 3: 19–28. [Google Scholar]
  • Rørslett B. 1991. Principal determinants of aquatic macrophyte richness in northern European lakes. Aquat Botany 39: 173–193. [Google Scholar]
  • Roscoe D, Hinch S, Cooke S, Patterson D. 2011. Fishway passage and post‐passage mortality of up‐river migrating sockeye salmon in the Seton River, British Columbia. River Res Appl 27: 693–705. [Google Scholar]
  • Roscoe DW, Hinch SG. 2010. Effectiveness monitoring of fish passage facilities: historical trends, geographic patterns and future directions. Fish Fisheries 11: 12–33. [Google Scholar]
  • Rowan JS, Carwardine J, Duck RW, Bragg OM, Black AR, Cutler MEJ, Soutar I, Boon PB. 2006. Development of a technique for Lake Habitat Survey (LHS) with applications for the European union water framework directive. Aquat Conserv: Marine Freshw Ecosyst 16: 637–657. [Google Scholar]
  • Roy R, Tissot L, Argillier C. 2021. Environmental drivers of fish spatial distribution and activity in a reservoir with water level fluctuations. Hydroécologie Appliquée 21: 25–46. [Google Scholar]
  • Rubin SP, Miller IM, Foley MM, Berry HD, Duda JJ, Hudson B, Elder NE, Beirne MM, Warrick JA, McHenry ML, Stevens AW, Eidam EF, Ogston AS, Gelfenbaum G, Pedersen R. 2017. Increased sediment load during a large-scale dam removal changes nearshore subtidal communities. PLOS ONE 12: e0187742. [Google Scholar]
  • Ryan Bellmore J, Duda JJ, Craig LS, Greene SL, Torgersen CE, Collins MJ, Vittum K. 2017. Status and trends of dam removal research in the United States. WIREs Water 4: e1164. [Google Scholar]
  • Rydin E, Vrede T, Persson J, Holmgren S, Jansson M, Tranvik L, Milbrink G. 2008. Compensatory nutrient enrichment in an oligotrophicated mountain reservoir − effects and fate of added nutrients. Aquat Sci 70: 323–336. [Google Scholar]
  • Sabo JL, Power ME. 2002. River-watershed exchange: effects of riverine subsidies on riparian lizards and their terrestrial prey. Ecology 83: 1860–1869. [Google Scholar]
  • Salmon Q, Colas F, Westrelin S, Dublon J, Baudoin J-M. 2022. Floating Littoral Zone (FLOLIZ): A solution to sustain macroinvertebrate communities in regulated lakes? Ecol Eng 176: 106509. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Salmon Q, Westrelin S, Dublon J, Abadie E, Baudoin J-M. 2024. Artificial floating littoral zones: a promising nursery to support pike (Esox lucius) in reservoirs. Int J Limnol 60: 22. [CrossRef] [EDP Sciences] [Google Scholar]
  • Salmon Q, Westrelin S, Dublon J, Fonbonne S, Baudoin J-M. 2025. An evaluation of artificial floating littoral zones to support fish communities in reservoirs. Knowl Manag Aquat Ecosyst 426: 3. [Google Scholar]
  • Salonen JK, Luhta P, Moilanen E, Oulasvirta P, Turunen J, Taskinen J. 2017. Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and brown trout (Salmo trutta) differ in their suitability as hosts for the endangered freshwater pearl mussel (Margaritifera margaritifera) in northern Fennoscandian rivers. Freshw Biol 62: 1346–1358. [Google Scholar]
  • Saltveit Sj, Halleraker Jh, Arnekleiv Jv, Harby A. 2001. Field experiments on stranding in juvenile Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) and brown trout (Salmo trutta) during rapid flow decreases caused by hydropeaking. Regulat Rivers: Res Manag 17: 609–622. [Google Scholar]
  • Sandin L. 2009. The effects of catchment land-use, near-stream vegetation, and river hydromorphology on benthic macroinvertebrate communities in a south-Swedish catchment. Fund Appl Limnol 174: 75–87. [Google Scholar]
  • SEPA (Swedish Environmental Protection Agency). 2011. Vägledning för Svämlövskog. Vägledning för svenska naturtyper i habitatdirektivets bilaga 1. NV-04493-11. [Google Scholar]
  • Sass GG. 2009. Coarse woody debris in lakes and streams. In Likens GE eds. Encyclopedia of Inland Waters, Oxford : Academic Press, pp. 60–69. [Google Scholar]
  • Sayers MJ, Fahnenstiel Gary L, Shuchman Robert A, Bosse KR. 2021. A new method to estimate global freshwater phytoplankton carbon fixation using satellite remote sensing: initial results. Int J Remote Sense 42: 3708–3730. [Google Scholar]
  • Schäfer T. 2021. Legal protection schemes for free-flowing rivers in Europe: an overview. Sustainability 13: 6423. [Google Scholar]
  • Schiavon A, Comoglio C, Candiotto A, Spairani M, Hölker F, Tarena F, Watz J, et al. 2024. Navigating the drought: upstream migration of a small-sized Cypriniformes (Telestes muticellus) in response to drying in a partially intermittent mountain stream. Knowl Manag Aquat Ecosyst 425: 6. [Google Scholar]
  • Schmutz S, Mielach C. 2013. Measures for ensuring fish migration at transversal structures. ICPDR-Internat. Commission for the Protection of the Danube River. [Google Scholar]
  • Schmutz S, Bakken TH, Friedrich T, Greimel F, Harby A, Jungwirth M, Melcher A, et al. 2015. Response of fish communities to hydrological and morphological alterations in hydropeaking rivers of Austria. River Res Appl 31: 919–930. [Google Scholar]
  • Schneider LD. 2017. Conservation ecology of the thick-shelled river mussel Unio crassus: The importance of parasite-host interactions. Karlstad University. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:1067005 (Accessed 3 January 2025). [Google Scholar]
  • Schwinn M, Baktoft H, Aarestrup K, Lucas MC, Koed A. 2018. Telemetry observations of predation and migration behaviour of brown trout (Salmo trutta) smolts negotiating an artificial lake. River Res Appl 34: 898–906. [Google Scholar]
  • Sethi SS, Bick A, Chen M-Y., Crouzeilles R, Hillier BV, Lawson J, Lee C-Y, et al. 2024. Large-scale avian vocalization detection delivers reliable global biodiversity insights. Proc Natl Acad Sci 121: e2315933121. [Google Scholar]
  • Sharma S, Gray DK, Read JS, O'reilly CM, Schneider P, Qudrat A, Gries C, et al. 2015. A global database of lake surface temperatures collected by in situ and satellite methods from 1985–2009. Sci Data 2: 1–19. [Google Scholar]
  • Silva AT, Lucas MC, Castro‐Santos T, Katopodis C, Baumgartner LJ, Thiem JD, Aarestrup K, et al. 2018. The future of fish passage science, engineering, and practice. Fish Fisheries 19: 340–362. [Google Scholar]
  • SIS. 2021. Standard − Water quality − Guidance for assessing the efficiency and related metrics of fish passage solutions using telemetry SS-EN 17233:2021 − Swedish Institute for Standards, SIS. SS-EN 17233:2021. https://www.sis.se/en/produkter/environment-health-protection-safety/water-quality/other/ss-en-172332021/ (Accessed 15 January 2025). [Google Scholar]
  • Smith BD, Maitland PS, Pennock SM. 1987. A comparative study of water level regimes and littoral benthic communities in Scottish lochs. Biol Conserv 39: 291–316. [Google Scholar]
  • Souchon Y, Sabaton C, Deibel R, Reiser D, Kershner J, Gard M, Katopodis C, Leonard P, Poff NL, Miller WJ, Lamb BL. 2008. Detecting biological responses to flow management: Missed opportunities; future directions. River Res Appl 24: 506–518. [Google Scholar]
  • Sousa R, Ferreira A, Carvalho F, Lopes‐Lima M, Varandas S, Teixeira A. 2018. Die‐offs of the endangered pearl mussel Margaritifera margaritifera during an extreme drought. Aquat Conserv: Marine Freshw Ecosyst 28: 1244–1248. [Google Scholar]
  • Sousa R, Ferreira A, Carvalho F, Lopes-Lima M, Varandas S, Teixeira A, Gallardo B. 2020. Small hydropower plants as a threat to the endangered pearl mussel Margaritifera margaritifera. Sci Total Environ 719: 137361. [Google Scholar]
  • Staveley TAB, Ahlbeck Bergendahl I. 2022. Pink salmon distribution in Sweden: the calm before the storm? Ecol Evol 12: e9194. [Google Scholar]
  • Stich DS, Zydlewski GB, Kocik JF, Zydlewski JD. 2015. Linking behavior, physiology, and survival of Atlantic salmon smolts during estuary migration. Marine Coast Fish 7: 68–86. [Google Scholar]
  • Strasevicius D, Jonsson M, Nyholm NEI, Malmqvist B. 2013. Reduced breeding success of Pied Flycatchers Ficedula hypoleuca along regulated rivers. Ibis 155: 348–356. [Google Scholar]
  • Stuart IG, Marsden TJ. 2019. Evaluation of cone fishways to facilitate passage of small-bodied fish. Aquac Fish 6: 125–134. [Google Scholar]
  • Sundin J, Näslund J, Jacobson P, Jacobson B, Östergren J, Nyqvist D. 2025. Insights from the initial stage of a nation-wide environmental relicensing of hydropower facilities: a biologists' perspective on court verdicts. Other Life Sci. https://doi.org/10.32942/X2J06V [Google Scholar]
  • Sutela T, Mutenia A, Salonen E. 2002. Relationship between annual variation in reservoir conditions and year-class strength of peled (Coregonus peled) and whitefish (C. lavaretus). Hydrobiologia 485: 213–221. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sutela T, Vehanen T. 2008. Effects of water-level regulation on the nearshore fish community in boreal lakes. Hydrobiologia 613: 13–20. [Google Scholar]
  • Sutela T, Vehanen T, Rask M. 2011. Assessment of the ecological status of regulated lakes: stressor-specific metrics from littoral fish assemblages. Hydrobiologia 675: 55–64. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Sutela T, Aroviita J, Keto A. 2013. Assessing ecological status of regulated lakes with littoral macrophyte, macroinvertebrate and fish assemblages. Ecol Ind 24: 185–192. [Google Scholar]
  • Svensson M. 2016. Inventering av stormusslor kring E.ON:s kraftverk i Emån 2015. https://www.lansstyrelsen.se/kalmar/om-oss/vara-tjanster/publikationer/2016/inventering-av-stormusslor-kring-e.ons-kraftverk-i-eman-2015.html (Accessed 13 September 2024). [Google Scholar]
  • Tamario C, Calles O, Watz J, Nilsson PA, Degerman E. 2019. Coastal river connectivity and the distribution of ascending juvenile European eel (Anguilla anguilla L.): Implications for conservation strategies regarding fish‐passage solutions. Aquat Conserv: Marine Freshw Ecosyst 29: 612–622. [Google Scholar]
  • Tarena F, Nyqvist D, Katopodis C, Comoglio C. 2024. Computational fluid dynamics in fishway research − a systematic review on upstream fish passage solutions. J Ecohydraulics 10: 107–126. [Google Scholar]
  • Tavşanoğlu ÜN, Šorf M, Stefanidis K, Brucet S, Türkan S, Agasild H, Baho DL, et al. 2017. Effects of nutrient and water level changes on the composition and size structure of zooplankton communities in shallow lakes under different climatic conditions: a pan-European mesocosm experiment. Aquat Ecol 51: 257–273. [Google Scholar]
  • Thieme M, Birnie-Gauvin K, Opperman JJ, Franklin PA, Richter H, Baumgartner L, Ning N, et al. 2024. Measures to safeguard and restore river connectivity. Environ Rev 32: 366–386. [Google Scholar]
  • Thorstad EB, Rikardsen AH, Alp A, Okland F. 2013. The use of electronic tags in fish research: an overview of fish telemetry methods. Turkish J Fish Aquat Sci 13: 881–896. [Google Scholar]
  • Tirkaso WT, Gren I-M. 2022. Evaluation of cost efficiency in hydropower-related biodiversity restoration projects in Sweden − a stochastic frontier approach. J Environ Plann Manag 66: 221–240. [Google Scholar]
  • Tolonen K, Lehtinen A, Laamanen T, Koljonen S. 2024. Assessing the potential of environmental DNA for monitoring nature‐like bypasses: erroneous surveillance owing to DNA flow‐through. Environ DNA 6: e70004. [Google Scholar]
  • Tonka L. 2015. Hydropower license renewal and environmental protection policies: a comparison between Switzerland and the USA. Reg Environ Change 15: 539–548. [Google Scholar]
  • Tonkin JD, Olden JD, Merritt DM, Reynolds LV, Rogosch JS, Lytle DA. 2021. Designing flow regimes to support entire river ecosystems. Front Ecol Environ 19: 326–333. [Google Scholar]
  • Tonra CM, Sager-Fradkin K, Morley SA, Duda JJ, Marra PP. 2015. The rapid return of marine-derived nutrients to a freshwater food web following dam removal. Biol Conserv 192: 130–134. [Google Scholar]
  • Travnichek VH, Bain MB, Maceina MJ. 1995. Recovery of a warmwater fish assemblage after the initiation of a minimum-flow release downstream from a hydroelectric dam. Trans Am Fish Soc 124: 836–844. [Google Scholar]
  • Travnichek VH, Maceina MJ. 1994. Comparison of flow regulation effects on fish assemblages in shallow and deep water habitats in the Tallapoosa River, Alabama. J Freshw Ecol 9: 207–216. [Google Scholar]
  • Truchy A, Sponseller RA, Ecke F, Angeler DG, Kahlert M, Bundschuh M, Johnson RK, et al. 2022. Responses of multiple structural and functional indicators along three contrasting disturbance gradients. Ecol Ind 135: 108514. [Google Scholar]
  • Trussart S, Messier D, Roquet V, Aki S. 2002. Hydropower projects: a review of most effective mitigation measures. Energy Policy 30: 1251–1259. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Turgeon K, Turpin C, Gregory-Eaves I. 2019. Dams have varying impacts on fish communities across latitudes: a quantitative synthesis. Ecol Lett 22: 1501–1516. [Google Scholar]
  • Turner MA, Huebert DB, Findlay DL, Hendzel LL, Jansen WA, Bodaly R., Armstrong LM, et al. 2005. Divergent impacts of experimental lake-level drawdown on planktonic and benthic plant communities in a boreal forest lake. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 62: 991–1003. [Google Scholar]
  • Vander Zanden MJ, Gorsky A, Hansen GJA, Johnson PTJ, Latzka AW, Mikulyuk A, Rohwer RR, Spear MJ, Walsh JR. 2024. Nine lessons about aquatic invasive species from the North Temperate Lakes Long-Term Ecological Research (NTL-LTER) program. BioScience 74: 509–523. [Google Scholar]
  • Vaughn CC, Nichols SJ, Spooner DE. 2008. Community and foodweb ecology of freshwater mussels. J North Am Benthol Soc 27: 409–423. [Google Scholar]
  • Vehanen T, Lahti M. 2003. Movements and habitat use by pikeperch (Stizostedion lucioperca (L.)) in a hydropeaking reservoir. Ecol Freshw Fish 12: 203–215. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Vehanen T, Huusko A, Mäki‐Petäys A, Louhi P, Mykrä H, Muotka T. 2010. Applied issues: Effects of habitat rehabilitation on brown trout (Salmo trutta) in boreal forest streams. Freshw Biol 55: 2200–2214. [Google Scholar]
  • Venditti DA, Rondorf DW, Kraut JM. 2000. Migratory behavior and forebay delay of radio-tagged juvenile fall Chinook salmon in a lower Snake River impoundment. North Am J Fish Manag 20: 41–52. [Google Scholar]
  • Venus TE, Smialek N, Pander J, Harby A, Geist J. 2020. Evaluating cost trade-offs between hydropower and fish passage mitigation. Sustainability 12: 8520. [Google Scholar]
  • Vlahakis WC. 2023. Sensitivity of Norway spruce (Picea abies) to inundation. Master thesis. Umeå University. [Google Scholar]
  • Vogel S, Jansujwicz J. 2022. Navigating fish passage decisions during regulatory dam relicensing in Maine. Fish Manag Ecol 29: 69–87. [Google Scholar]
  • Volpato GL, Barreto RE, Marcondes AL, Andrade Moreira PS, de Barros Ferreira MF. 2009. Fish ladders select fish traits on migration-still a growing problem for natural fish populations. Mar Freshw Behav Physiol 42: 307–313. [Google Scholar]
  • Vörösmarty CJ, Meybeck M, Fekete B, Sharma K, Green P, Syvitski JP. 2003. Anthropogenic sediment retention: major global impact from registered river impoundments. Glob Planet Change 39: 169–190. [Google Scholar]
  • Walker KF, Boulton AJ, Thomas MC, Sheldon F. 1994. Effects of water-level changes induced by weirs on the distribution of littoral plants along the River Murray, South Australia. Marine Freshw Res 45: 1421–1438. [Google Scholar]
  • Walseng B, Jerstad K. 2011. Fossekall og småkraftverk. NVE. https://nve.brage.unit.no/nve-xmlui/handle/11250/2500845 [Google Scholar]
  • Walseng B, Jerstad K. 2014. Fossekall (Cinclus cinclus), småkraft og avbøtende tiltak. Norsk institutt for naturforskning. https://brage.nina.no/nina-xmlui/handle/11250/2385622 [Google Scholar]
  • Wang J, Ding C, Heino J, Jiang X, Tao J, Ding L, Su W, et al. 2020. What explains the variation in dam impacts on riverine macroinvertebrates? A global quantitative synthesis. Environ Res Lett 15: 124028. [Google Scholar]
  • Wang L, Infante D, Lyons J, Stewart J, Cooper A. 2011. Effects of dams in river networks on fish assemblages in non‐impoundment sections of rivers in Michigan and Wisconsin, USA. River Res Appl 27: 473–487. [Google Scholar]
  • Ward JV, Stanford JA. 1982. Thermal responses in the evolutionary ecology of aquatic insects. Ann Rev Entomol 27: 97–117. [Google Scholar]
  • Ward JV. 1989. The four-dimensional nature of lotic ecosystems. J North Am Benthol Soc 8: 2–8. [Google Scholar]
  • Ward JV, Stanford JA. 1995. Ecological connectivity in alluvial river ecosystems and its disruption by flow regulation. Regulat Rivers: Res Manag 11: 105–119. [Google Scholar]
  • Ward JV, Tockner K, Arscott DB, Claret C. 2002. Riverine landscape diversity. Freshw Biol 47: 517–539. [Google Scholar]
  • Watters GT. 1996. Small dams as barriers to freshwater mussels (Bivalvia, Unionoida) and their hosts. Biol Conserv 75: 79–85. [Google Scholar]
  • Watz J, Piccolo JJ. 2011. The role of temperature in the prey capture probability of drift‐feeding juvenile brown trout (Salmo trutta). Ecol Freshw Fish 20: 393–399. [Google Scholar]
  • Watz J, Bergman E, Piccolo JJ, Greenberg L. 2016. Ice cover affects the growth of a stream-dwelling fish. Oecologia: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00442-016-3555-z [Google Scholar]
  • Weber C, Åberg U, Buijse AD, Hughes FMR, McKie BG, Piégay H, Roni P, et al. 2018. Goals and principles for programmatic river restoration monitoring and evaluation: collaborative learning across multiple projects. WIREs Water 5: e1257. [Google Scholar]
  • Wegscheider B, MacLean HO, Linnansaari T, Curry RA. 2019. Freshwater mussel abundance and species composition downstream of a large hydroelectric generating station. Hydrobiologia 836: 207–218. [Google Scholar]
  • Weisberg SB, Janicki AJ, Gerritsen J, Wilson HT. 1990. Enhancement of benthic macroinvertebrates by minimum flow from a hydroelectric dam. Regulat Rivers: Res Manag 5: 265–277. [Google Scholar]
  • Weisberg SB, Burton WH. 1993. Enhancement of fish feeding and growth after an increase in minimum flow below the Conowingo Dam. North Am J Fish Manag 13: 103–109. [Google Scholar]
  • Weitkamp DE, Katz M. 1980. A review of dissolved gas supersaturation literature. Trans Am Fisheries Soc 109: 659–702. [Google Scholar]
  • Westgate MJ, Likens GE, Lindenmayer DB. 2013. Adaptive management of biological systems: a review. Biol Conserv 158: 128–139. [Google Scholar]
  • Westrelin S, Roy R, Tissot-Rey L, Bergès L, Argillier C. 2018. Habitat use and preference of adult perch (Perca fluviatilis L.) in a deep reservoir: variations with seasons, water levels and individuals. Hydrobiologia 809: 121–139. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Widén Å, Renöfält BM, Degerman E, Wisaeus D, Jansson R. 2021. Let it flow: modeling ecological benefits and hydropower production impacts of banning zero-flow events in a large regulated river system. Sci Total Environ 783: 147010. [Google Scholar]
  • Widén Å, Segersten J, Donadi S, Degerman E, Malm-Renöfält B, Karlsson Tiselius A, Lundbäck S, et al. 2022. Sveriges torrfåror: geografi, naturvärden och metoder för miljöförbättringar. Umeå university, Umeå. https://www.diva-portal.org/smash/record.jsf?pid=diva2:1733276 (Accessed 2 December 2024). [Google Scholar]
  • Wilcox DA, Meeker JE. 1992. Implications for faunal habitat related to altered macrophyte structure in regulated lakes in northern Minnesota. Wetlands 12: 192–203. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Wilcox TM, McKelvey KS, Young MK, Sepulveda AJ, Shepard BB, Jane SF, Whiteley AR, et al. 2016. Understanding environmental DNA detection probabilities: a case study using a stream-dwelling char Salvelinus fontinalis. Biol Conserv 194: 209–216. [Google Scholar]
  • Wohl E, Lane SN, Wilcox AC. 2015. The science and practice of river restoration. Water Resour Res 51: 5974–5997. [Google Scholar]
  • Woolsey S, Capelli F, Gonser T, Hoehn E, Hostmann M, Junker B, Paetzold A, et al. 2007. A strategy to assess river restoration success. Freshw Biol 52: 752–769. [Google Scholar]
  • Wu N, Tang T, Zhou S, Jia X, Li D, Liu R, Cai Q. 2009. Changes in benthic algal communities following construction of a run-of-river dam. J North Am Benthol Soc 28: 69–79. [Google Scholar]
  • Wu N, Tang T, Fu X, Jiang W, Li F, Zhou S, Cai Q, et al. 2010. Impacts of cascade run-of-river dams on benthic diatoms in the Xiangxi River, China. Aquat Sci 72: 117–125. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Yamamoto T, Kohmatsu Y, Yuma M. 2006. Effects of summer drawdown on cyprinid fish larvae in Lake Biwa, Japan. Limnology 7: 75–82. [Google Scholar]
  • Yamanaka H, Minamoto T. 2016. The use of environmental DNA of fishes as an efficient method of determining habitat connectivity. Ecol Ind 62: 147–153. [Google Scholar]
  • Young PS, Cech JJ, Thompson LC. 2011. Hydropower-related pulsed-flow impacts on stream fishes: a brief review, conceptual model, knowledge gaps, and research needs. Rev Fish Biol Fish 21: 713–731. [Google Scholar]
  • Zhang C, Xu M, Lei F, Zhang J, Kattel GR, Duan Y. 2022. Spatio-temporal distribution of Gymnocypris przewalskii during migration with UAV-based photogrammetry and deep neural network. J Ecohydraulics 7: 42–57. [Google Scholar]
  • Zaidel PA, Roy AH, Houle KM, Lambert B, Letcher BH, Nislow KH, Smith C. 2021. Impacts of small dams on stream temperature. Ecol Ind 120: 106878. [Google Scholar]
  • Zarfl C, Lumsdon AE, Berlekamp J, Tydecks L, Tockner K. 2015. A global boom in hydropower dam construction. Aquat Sci 77: 161–170. [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]
  • Zohary T, Ostrovsky I. 2011. Ecological impacts of excessive water level fluctuations in stratified freshwater lakes. Inland Waters 1: 47–59. [CrossRef] [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.