ArticlePloS one2019
Tackling reservoir siltation by controlled sediment flushing: Impact on downstream fauna and related management issues.
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Experimental quantification of influencing parameters on free-flow flushing efficiency in reservoirs.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Article
- Two-year assessment of the effects of controlled sediment flushing on stream habitats and biota at reach scale.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sediment flushing can tackle reservoirs siltation and improve sediment flux through dammed rivers. However, the increase of the sediment loading below the dam can trigger a suite of undesired ecological effects in the downstream river reaches. To limit these drawbacks, sediment flushing can be controlled, by jointly regulating the sediment concentration of the evacuated water and the streamflow in the downstream channel. In this paper, we report on ten controlled sediment flushing operations (CSFOs), carried out between 2006 and 2012 in the central Italian Alps, at four hydropower reservoirs. These CSFOs displayed specific common traits: (i) Limits were set by the local environmental authorities concerning the allowable suspended sediment concentration. (ii) Reservoirs were fully drawn-down, earth-moving equipment was used to dislodge sediment, and the downstream water discharge was increased, compared to baseflow, by operating upstream intakes. (iii) Abiotic and biotic measurements in selected downstream reaches (before, during, and after the CSFOs) represented an integral part of the operations. In contrast, significant differences characterize the hydropower facilities (elevation and storage of reservoirs, in particular) as well as the basic CSFOs parameters (i.e., season, duration, mass and grain-size of the evacuated sediment, suspended sediment concentration). The macroinvertebrate assemblages resulted noticeably impacted by the CSFOs. In the short term, a significant density drop was observed, slightly influenced by the extent of the perturbation. In contrast, the latter appeared to control the assemblages contraction in terms of richness, according to the different sensitivity to sediment stress of the different taxa. The time employed to recover pre-CSFO standard ranged from few months to just under one year, and the related patterns would seem mostly correlated to the flushing season and to further site specificities. The density of trout populations was impacted as well, thus suggesting the adoption of mitigating strategies as removal by electrofishing before, and repopulation after the CSFO.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.