Aquatic Sciences

, 80:5 | Cite as

Modeling hydrologic connectivity and virtual fish movement across a large Southeastern floodplain, USA

  • Kimberly M. Meitzen
  • John A. Kupfer
  • Peng Gao
Research Article


Lateral hydrologic connectivity between a river and its floodplain is important for exchanges of organisms and materials that support healthy, functioning riverine ecosystems. We use a GIS-based distance, cost-weighted spatial model to measure the possible pathways and travel durations for fish migrating from a mainstem river channel to ten different floodplain lakes during a range of discharge magnitudes. We modeled routes of movement and fish swim times for five discharges that ranged from 140 to 1585 m3 s−1 and represented a gradient of hydrologic connectivity. Hydrologic travel pathways included perennial floodplain channels (tributaries and permanent lakes) and intermittently active floodplain channels (channels re-occupying abandoned meander segments, meander-scrolls, batture channels, and crevasses). The different hydrologic pathways made available during the different discharge magnitudes were represented using spatially-variable, raster-based cost surfaces. Fish swim times and route of movement varied with discharge magnitude and lake location. Two distinct patterns emerged between the fish swim times and routes of movement. One group of five floodplain lakes experienced very little change in the route or rate of fish movement with increasing discharge, while another group of five lakes exhibited significant decreases in swim time with increasing discharge. These responses indicate the importance of managing for flood pulses of various magnitudes that hydrologically connect the river and floodplain through different pathways, enabling dynamic spatial and temporal exchanges of organisms and materials.


Lateral connectivity Flood pulse Cost-weighted modelling Congaree National Park 


  1. Adriaensen F, Chardon JP, De Blust G, Swinnen E, Villalba S, Gulinck H, Matthysen E (2003) The application of ‘least-cost’ modelling as a functional landscape model. Landsc Urban Plan 64:233–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agostinho A, Zalewski M (1995) The dependence of fish community structure and dynamics on floodplain and riparian ecotone zone in Parana River, Brazil. Hydrobiologia 303:141–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allan JD, Flecker AS (1993) Biodiversity conservation in running waters. Bioscience 43:32–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Amoros C, Bornette G (2002) Connectivity and bio-complexity in waterbodies of riverine floodplains. Freshwater Biol 47:761–776CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barko VA, Herzog DP, O’Connell MT (2006) Response of fishes to floodplain connectivity during and following a 500-year flood event in the unimpounded upper Mississippi River. Wetlands 26:244–257/CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bayley PB (1995) Understanding large river floodplain ecosystems. Bioscience 45:153–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bornette G, Amoros C, Piegay H, Tachet J, Hein T (1998) Ecological complexity of wetlands within a river landscape. Biol Conserv 85:35–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Codling EA, Plank MJ, Benhamou S (2008) Random walk models in biology. J R Soc Interface 5:813–834CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Compton BW, McGarigal K, Cushman SA, Gamble LR (2007) A resistant-kernel model of connectivity for amphibians that breed in vernal pools. Conserv Biol 21:788–799CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Conrads PA, Feaster TD, Harrelson LG (2008) The effects of the Saluda Dam on the surface-water and ground-water hydrology of the Congaree National Park flood plain, South Carolina. U.S. Geological Survey Scientific Investigations Report 2008–5170, 58 p. Accessed 2010
  11. Driezen K, Adriaensen F, Rondinini C, Doncaster CP, Matthysen E (2007) Evaluating least-cost model predictions with empirical dispersal data: a case-study using radiotracking data of hedgehogs (Erinaceus europaeus). Ecol Model 209:314–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Epps CW, Wehausen JD, Bleich VC, Torres SG, Brashares JS (2007) Optimizing dispersal and corridor models using landscape genetics. J Appl Ecol (44)4:714–724CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. ESRI (2017) ArcGIS Desktop, software v.10. Environmental Systems Research Institute, RedlandsGoogle Scholar
  14. Graf WL (2006) Downstream hydrologic and geomorphic effects of large dams on American rivers. Geomorphology 79:336–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Graf WL, Meitzen KM (2006) Congaree floodplain decision support project: assessing the extent of river regulation effects on resources within and around Congaree National Park, Part II: floodplain inundation modeling using HEC-RAS and GIS. National Park Service. NPS/COSW/R5240050013Google Scholar
  16. Hanke MH, Lambert JD, Smith KJ (2014) Utilization of a multicriteria least cost path model in an aquatic environment. Int J Geogr Inf Sci 28:1642–1657CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hill MH, Platt WS (1991) Ecological and geomorphological concepts for instream and out of stream flows requirements. Rivers 2:198–210Google Scholar
  18. Horritt MS, Bates PD (2002) Evaluation of 1D and 2D numerical models for predicting river flood inundation. J Hydrol 268:87–99CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hyslop EJ (1988) A comparison of the composition of the juvenile fish catch from the Sokoto-Rima foodplain, Nigeria in years preceding and immediately after upstream dam completion. J Fish Biol 32:895–905CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Johnson DS, London JM, Lea MA, Durban JW (2008) Continuous-time correlated random walk model for animal telemetry data. Ecology 89:1208–1215CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Kaase CT, Kupfer JA (2016) Sedimentation patterns across a Coastal Plain floodplain: the importance of hydrogeomorphic influences and cross-floodplain connectivity. Geomorphology 269:43–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Karim F, Dutta D, Marvanek S, Petheram C, Ticehurst C, Lerata J, Kim S, Yang A (2015) Assessing the impacts of climate change and dams on floodplain inundation and wetland connectivity in the wet-dry tropics of northern Australia. J Hydrol 522:80–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Killgore KJ, Baker JA (1996) Patterns of larval fish abundance in a bottomland hardwood wetland. Wetlands 16:288–295CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Killgore KJ, Hoover JJ (1999) Restoration and Enhancement of Aquatic Habitats. Ecosystem Management and Restoration. Ecosystem Management and Restoration Research Program USACEGoogle Scholar
  25. Koman P (2003) The hydrologic effects of dams on the Saluda River, South Carolina. Unpublished Masters Thesis, Thomas Cooper Library, USC-ColumbiaGoogle Scholar
  26. Kramer DL, Mc Laughlin RL (2001) The behavior ecology of intermittent locomotion. Am Zool 441:137–153Google Scholar
  27. Kupfer JA (2012) Landscape ecology and biogeography: rethinking landscape metrics in a post-FRAGSTATS landscape. Prog Phys Geog 36:400–420CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kupfer JA, Meitzen KM, Gao P (2015) Flooding and surface connectivity of Taxodium-Nyssa stands in a southern floodplain forest ecosystem. River Res Appl 31:1299–1310CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Leavy TR, Bonner TH (2009) Relationships among swimming ability, current velocity association and morphology for freshwater lotic fishes. N Am J Fish Manag 2972–2983Google Scholar
  30. Lee J, Ellis CD, Choi YE, You S, Chon J (2015) An integrated approach to mitigation wetland site selection: a case study in gwacheon, Korea. Sustainability (Switzerland) 7:3386–3413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Leopold LB, Wolman MG, Miller JP (1964) Fluvial processes in geomorphology. W.H. Freeman, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Magilligan FJ, Nislow KH (2001) Long-term changes in regional hydrologic regime following impoundment in a humid-climate watershed. J Am Water Resour As 37(6):1551–1569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Marcy BC, Fletcher DE, Martin FD, Paller MH, Reichert MJM (2005) Fishes of the middle Savannah River basin: with emphasis on the Savannah River Site. University of Georgia Press, AthensGoogle Scholar
  34. Marsh LM, Jones RE (1988) The form and consequences of random walk movement models. J Theor Biol 133 1:113–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Matella MK, Merenlender AM (2015) Scenarios for restoring floodplain ecology given changes to river flows under climate change: case from the San Joaquin River, California. River Res Appl 31:280–290CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McElroy B, DeLonay AJ, Jacobson RB (2012) Optimum swimming pathways of fish spawning migrations in rivers. Ecology 93:29–34CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. McRae BH, Dickson BG, Keitt TH, Shah VB (2008) Using circuit theory to model connectivity in ecology, evolution, and conservation. Ecology 89:2712–2724CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Meitzen KM (2011) Flood processes, forest dynamics, and disturbance in the Congaree River floodplain, South Carolina. Dissertation, Univ. of South Carolina, Columbia, SC, USAGoogle Scholar
  39. Meitzen KM, Kupfer JA (2015) Abandoned meander forest development in a large alluvial southeastern floodplain, South Carolina, USA. River Syst 21(2–3):141–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Meitzen KM, Doyle MW, Burns CE (2013) Geomorphology in the interdisciplinary science of environmental flows. Geomorphology 200:143–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Morán-Ordóñez A, Pavlova A, Pinder AM, Sim L, Sunnucks P, Thompson RM, Davis J (2015) Aquatic communities in arid landscapes: local conditions, dispersal traits and landscape configuration determine local biodiversity. Divers Distrib 21:1230–1241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Opperman JJ, Luster R, McKenney BA, Roberts M, AW Meadows (2010) Ecologically functional floodplains: connectivity, flow regime, and scale. J Am Water Res As 46:211–226CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Plewa TM, Graf WL (2005) Hydrologic variation of the Congaree River, near Congaree National Park. Report for National Park Service, p 22Google Scholar
  44. Poff NL, Allan JD, Bain MB, Karr JR, Prestegaard KL, Richter BD, Sparks RE, Stromberg JC (1997) The natural flow regime. Bioscience 47:769–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Power ME, Sun A, Parker G, Dietrich WE, Wootton JT (1995a) Hydraulic food chain models. Bioscience 45:159–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Power ME, Parker G, Dietrich WE, Sun A (1995b) How does floodplain width affect floodplain river ecology? A preliminary exploration using simulations. Geomorphology 13:301–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Prenosil E, Koupal K, Grauf J, Schoenebeck C, Hobak W (2016) Swimming and jumping ability of 10 Great Plains fish species. J Freshw Ecol 31 1:123–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Quéméré E, Baglinière JL, Roussel JM, Evanno G, McGinnity P, Launey S (2016) Seascape and its effect on migratory life-history strategy influences gene flow among coastal brown trout (Salmo trutta) populations in the English Channel. J Biogeogr 43:498–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Rayfield B, Fortin MJ, Fall A (2011) Connectivity for conservation: a framework to classify network measures. Ecology 92 4:847–858CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rose L (2004) Species diversity and condition of the fish community during a drought in Congaree National Park. MS Thesis, University of South Carolina, Columbia, South Carolina, p 39Google Scholar
  51. Rose L, Bulak J (2007). Flood mediated change of the fish community in Congaree National Park streams. Final report for the National Park Service (COSW-2001-SCI-0007), p 21Google Scholar
  52. Sawyer SC, Epps CW, Brashares JS (2011) Placing linkages among fragmented habitats: do least-cost models reflect how animals use landscapes? J Appl Ecol 48:668–678CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Scott MT, Nielsen LA (1989) Young fish distribution in backwaters ad main-channel borders of the Kanawha River, West Virginia. J Fish Biol 35:21–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Shelley DC, Thom T, Armstrong W, Dvoracek D (2011) Radiocarbon constraints on Late Quaternary development of floodplain landscapes at Congaree National Park [abstract]. In: Joint conference of the Southern Appalachian Mountains, the Piedmont-South Atlantic Coast, South Florida-Caribbean and Gulf Coast Cooperative Ecosystem Studies Units, St. PetersburgGoogle Scholar
  55. Syme WJ (1991) Dynamically linked two-dimensional/one-dimensional hydrodynamic modelling program for rivers, estuaries & coastal waters. Thesis, University of Queensland. Brisbane, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  56. Tejerina-Garro FL, Fortin R, Rodriguez MA (1998) Fish community structure in relation to environmental variation in floodplain lakes of the Araguaia River, Amazon Basin. Environ Biol Fish 51:399–410CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Tockner K, Malard F, Ward JV (2000) An extension of the flood pulse concept. Hydrol Process 14:2861–2883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Turner FT, Trexler JC, Miller GL, Toyer KE (1994) Temporal and spatial dynamics of larval and juvenile fish abundance in a temperate floodplain river. Copeia 1:174–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. USACE HEC (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Hydrologic Engineering Center) (2010) Hydrologic engineering center statistical software package. Accessed 2010
  60. Walsh HJ, Settle LR, Peters DS (2005) Early life history of blueback herring and alewife in the lower Roanoke River, North Carolina. T Am Fish Soc 134:910–926CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Wang IJ, Savage WK, Shaffer HB (2009) Landscape genetics and least-cost path analysis reveal unexpected dispersal routes in the California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense). Mol Ecol 18:1365–1374CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. Ward JV (1998) Riverine landscapes: biodiversity patterns, disturbance regimes, and aquatic conservation. Biol Conserv 83:269–278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Ward DL, Schultz AA, Matson PG (2003) Differences in swimming ability and behavior in response to high water velocities among native and non-native fishes. Environ Biol Fish 68:87–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Webb PW (1975) Hydrodynamics and energetics of fish propulsion. Bull Fish Res Board Can 190:1–159Google Scholar
  65. Welcomme RL, Halls A (2001) Some considerations of the effects of differences in flood patterns on fish populations. Ecohydrol Hydrobiol 1:313–321Google Scholar
  66. Whiting PJ (2003) Flow Measurement and characterization. In: Kondolf GM, Piegay H (eds) Tools in fluvial geomorphology. Wiley, England, pp 323–346Google Scholar
  67. Zeug SC, Winemiller KO, Tarim S (2005) Response of Brazos River oxbow fish assemblages to patterns of hydrologic connectivity and environmental variability. T Am Fish Soc 134:1389–1399CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kimberly M. Meitzen
    • 1
  • John A. Kupfer
    • 2
  • Peng Gao
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Texas State University, GeographySan MarcosUSA
  2. 2.University of South Carolina, GeographyColumbiaUSA

Personalised recommendations