|
|
| |
|
|
| 本文已被：浏览 563次 下载 818次 |
码上扫一扫！ |
|
|
| 不同声音对草鱼幼鱼负趋音性行为反应影响研究 |
|
何晨睿,李晓兵,达瓦,尼玛旦增,张占,王艳,占慧芬,刘媛媛,胡晓,石小涛,刘国勇
|
|
1.三峡大学水利与环境学院 湖北 宜昌 443002;2.湖北省鱼类过坝技术国际科技合作基地 湖北 宜昌 443002;3.中水北方勘测设计研究有限责任公司 天津 300222;4.西藏自治区水利电力规划勘测设计研究院
西藏 拉萨 850000;5.三峡大学土木与建筑学院 湖北 宜昌 443002;6.湖北省鱼类过坝技术国际科技合作基地 湖北 宜昌 443003;7.湖北省鱼类过坝技术国际科技合作基地 湖北 宜昌 443004;8.湖北省鱼类过坝技术国际科技合作基地 湖北 宜昌 443005;9.湖北省鱼类过坝技术国际科技合作基地 湖北 宜昌 443006
|
|
| 摘要: |
| 声驱鱼技术作为辅助过鱼措施之一，承担着保证鱼类洄游顺利通过过鱼设施，继而保护鱼类资源和恢复河流连通性的重要作用。本研究采用交替播音的形式，以草鱼(Ctenopharyngodon idellus)幼鱼为研究对象进行负趋音性实验，旨在探究草鱼幼鱼面对不同声音的行为反应。实验水槽(3.6 m×1.1 m×1.0 m)布置于下牢溪周围水域，平均水深为0.5 m，平均流速为0.06 m/s。实验使用1种单频音(1 000 Hz)和5种复杂音(鱼游动声、引擎声、短吻鳄叫声、打桩声和游艇声)，声压级(sound pressure level)为(117.69±2.77) dB re 1 μPa，对照组为未播放声音时草鱼的行为反应数据。结果显示，播放复杂音时，草鱼的反应次数、趋音速度、运动时间比均显著高于单频音和对照组(P<0.001)，草鱼的初次反应时间、平均反应时间均显著低于单频音和对照组(P<0.001)；复杂音中，受到游艇声刺激的草鱼反应次数和趋音速度最大，受到鱼游动声刺激的草鱼反应次数、趋音速度最小；复杂音中，受到游艇声刺激的草鱼初次反应时间最短，为(23.40±5.13) s；受到引擎声刺激的草鱼初次反应时间最长，为(146.00±7.82) s，显著低于其他复杂音(P<0.05)；受到游艇声和打桩声刺激的草鱼平均反应时间最短，分别为(26.52±3.01) s和(28.76±4.07) s；受到鱼游动声刺激的草鱼平均反应时间最长，为(64.76±17.82) s；复杂音中，受到鱼游动声刺激的草鱼运动时间比最高，为(98.47±0.48)%；受到引擎声刺激的草鱼运动时间比最低，为(94.58±0.54)%；播放单频音时，草鱼的反应次数、初次反应时间、平均反应时间、运动时间比均与对照组无显著差异(P>0.05)。本研究表明，5种复杂音(鱼游动声、引擎声、短吻鳄叫声、打桩声和游艇声)对草鱼幼鱼具有驱赶效果。本研究在丰富鱼类负趋音性研究的同时，为实际工程中声驱鱼辅助过鱼设施的设计和优化提供了科学依据。 |
| 关键词: 负趋音性 草鱼 声驱鱼技术 开放水域 |
| DOI：10.19663/j.issn2095-9869.20230316001 |
| 分类号: |
| 基金项目: |
|
| The negative phonotaxic responses of juvenile grass carp Ctenopharyngodon idellus subjected to different sounds |
|
HE Chenrui1,2, LI Xiaobing3, DA Wa4, NIMA Danzeng5, ZHANG Zhan6, WANG Yan7, ZHAN Huifen1,2, LIU Yuanyuan1,8, HU Xiao1,9, SHI Xiaotao1,10, LIU Guoyong1,11
|
|
1.College of Hydraulic and Environmental Engineering, China Three Gorges University, Yichang 443002, China;2.Hubei International Science and Technology Cooperation Base of Fish Passage, Yichang 443002, China;3.China Water Resources Beifang Investigation, Design and Research Co., Ltd., Tianjin 300222, China;4.Tibet Water Conservancy and Hydropower Planning Survey and Design Institute, Lasa 850000, China;5.Tibet Water Conservancy and Hydropower Planning Survey and Design Institute, Lasa 850001, China;6.Tibet Water Conservancy and Hydropower Planning Survey and Design Institute, Lasa 850002, China;7.College of Civil Engineering and Architecture, China Three Gorges University, Yichang 443002, China;8.Hubei International Science and Technology Cooperation Base of Fish Passage, Yichang 443003, China;9.Hubei International Science and Technology Cooperation Base of Fish Passage, Yichang 443004, China;10.Hubei International Science and Technology Cooperation Base of Fish Passage, Yichang 443005, China;11.Hubei International Science and Technology Cooperation Base of Fish Passage, Yichang 443006, China
|
| Abstract: |
| Acoustic fish driving technology, as an auxiliary fish passage measure and a non-physical barrier, is based on the use of sound signals to prevent or regulate fish behavior. The purpose of these techniques is to guide the fish away from dangerous areas, such as the water inlets of hydroelectric power stations, spillways, and ship locks, allowing them to easily locate the entrance to the fishway, which would help improve fish passage efficiency. Studying the negative phonotaxis behavior of fish is vital for establishing non-physical barriers using acoustic characteristics. However, there has been little research on verifying the effectiveness of acoustic fish deterrence technology in field environments. Therefore, this study used alternating sound playback to conduct negative phonotaxis experiments on grass carp (Ctenopharyngodon idellus) juveniles to explore their behavioral responses to different sounds. The experimental tank (3.6 m×1.1 m×1.0 m) was created in the waters of Xialao Creek in Yichang City, Hubei Province, with an average water depth of 0.5 m and an average flow rate of 0.06 m/s. The experiment used one single-frequency sound (1 000 Hz) and five complex sounds (fish swimming, engine, short-nosed crocodile call, pile driving, and yacht sounds), with a sound pressure level of (117.69±2.77) dB re 1 μPa. The effectiveness of acoustic fish-repellent technology has been proven, but there are only a few applications in practical engineering. On the one hand, the theoretical knowledge is not comprehensive, and on the other hand, there is a gap between theoretical research and practical engineering. Moreover, there are differences in proton movement (vibration) modes between indoor and natural environments. Compared with fish in an indoor environment, fish in natural waters tend to receive sound signals by proton movement rather than sound pressure. At the same time, the distribution of the sound field in natural and indoor environments also differs; thus, field experiments are necessary for the advancement of acoustic fish-repellent technology. Globally, studies on the negative phonotaxis of fish have mainly been conducted in vitro. Detailed studies using natural open water conditions are insufficient, and further field verification experiments are needed. Therefore, this study conducted experiments in natural open water, compared the sound field changes in the natural and indoor environments, and studied negative phonotaxis behavior by observing reaction time, initial reaction time, average reaction time, phonotaxis speed, movement time ratio, and other indicators. The results showed that when the complex sounds were played, the reaction times, tone trend speed and movement time ratio of grass carp were significantly higher than that of single tone and control group (P<0.001), and the initial reaction time and average reaction time of grass carp were significantly lower than that of single tone and control group (P<0.001). Among the complex sounds, the grass carp stimulated by the yacht sound had the largest response times and speed, while the grass carp stimulated by the fish swimming sound had the smallest response times and speed. In the complex sound, the first response time of grass carp stimulated by yacht sound was the shortest, which was (23.40±5.13) s. The first response time of grass carp stimulated by engine sound was (146.00±7.82) s, which was significantly lower than that of other complex sounds (P<0.05). The average response time of grass carp stimulated by the sound of yacht and pile was (26.52±3.01) s and (28.76±4.07) s, respectively. The average response time of grass carp stimulated by fish swimming sound was (64.76±17.82) s. In the complex sound, the motion time ratio of grass carp stimulated by fish swimming sound was the highest, which was (98.47±0.48)%. The motion time ratio of grass carp stimulated by engine sound was (94.58±0.54)%. There were no significant differences in reaction times, initial reaction time, average reaction time and exercise time ratio between grass carp and control group when playing single frequency tone (P>0.05). The experimental results indicated that the five complex sounds used in this study (fish swimming, engine, short-nosed crocodile call, pile driving, and yacht sounds) all had a deterrent effect on grass carp juveniles. This study not only enriches current knowledge of the negative phonotaxis behavior of fish but also provides a scientific basis for the design and optimization of sound-based fish deterrent facilities in practical engineering. |
| Key words: Negative phonotaxis Ctenopharyngodon idellus Technique of fish repelling using sound Open-field trial |
|
|
|
|