From the department of obvious science and anything to do with climate change must be bad comes this study from Australian National University:
Waves costly for fish
Big waves are energetically costly for fish, and there are more big waves than ever. The good news is that fish might be able to adapt.
“There has been a lot of recent work in oceanography documenting the fact that waves are becoming more frequent and more intense due to climate change,” says Mr Dominique Roche, PhD candidate from the Research School of Biology. “The habitats that fish live in are changing.”
“This is not a localised problem, but something that is documented globally,” adds Ms Sandra Binning, also a PhD candidate in the Research School of Biology.
Mr Roche and Ms Binning are co-authors on a study documenting the energy it takes for fish to swim through large, intense waves. Specifically, they focused on fish that swim with their arm, or pectoral fins, which are very common on both rocky and coral reefs.
“By controlling water flow in an experimental chamber with the help of a computer, we were able to replicate oscillations in the water flow like in a wave pool,” explains Mr Roche.
“We looked at how much energy the fish consumed while swimming without waves, in conditions with small waves, and in conditions with large waves. The idea was to compare the amount of energy that fish consume while swimming in these three conditions when their average swimming speed was exactly the same.”
Mr Roche and Ms Binning found that it’s a lot more energetically demanding for fish to deal with large fluctuations in water speed and wave height.
“It’s harder to constantly switch speeds than it is to remain at a constant speed, like a runner changing between running and walking during interval training versus a steady jog. Well, it’s the same for swimming fish,” says Mr Roche.
“Things could get tough for fish in windy, exposed habitats if waves get stronger with changing climate. But there may be a silver lining,” says Ms Binning.
“In the swim chamber, when the water flow increased, fish had to beat their fins faster to keep up. But when the water flow slowed down, some fish took advantage and rode the wave. Essentially, rather than beating their fins frantically, these fish used the momentum that they had gained while speeding up to glide and save energy.
“This means that some individuals are better at dealing with waves than others, and that there is hope for populations to adapt their swimming behavior to potentially changing conditions in the future,” concludes Mr Roche.
Their research was recently published in the Journal of Experimental Biology. View footage of the study species, Cymatogaster aggregata in the swim chamber.
Source: http://news.anu.edu.au/2014/02/03/waves-costly-for-fish/
=============================================================
Gosh, climate change will cause exhausted fish in the future, because as we all know, fish just can’t adapt to a changing environment; nature so poorly equipped them that something like a change in waves in the ocean will just muck up the whole population, because fish just can’t swim deeper to avoid surface turbulence, or something.
And, because this one species of fish is surely representative of all species and good enough to make a climate change with global ramifications related press release out of. Never mind this fact:
The shiner perch (Cymatogaster aggregata) is a common surfperch found in estuaries, lagoons, and coastal streams along the Pacific coast from Alaska to Baja California. It is the sole member of its genus.
…
They are one of the most common fish in the bays and estuaries of their range, favoring beds of eelgrass, and often accumulating around piers as well. They feed on zooplankton such as copepods, but have been observed to bottom feed as well.
Cuz, well, the bays and estuaries are connected to the ocean, and the ocean has waves, and they are getting bigger. And because, somehow, a bottom fish will be more affected by waves on the surface.
I downloaded the footage of the study species, Cymatogaster aggregata in the swim chamber, and have made it available here:
This is what passes for science now; it looks like a high school science fair project. Note the propeller. What I see is the velocity of water changing due to the propeller, an enclosed box, and no waves, i.e. an unnatural environment. As Willis is often fond of pointing out, an aquarium tank is not the ocean, and behavior of an animal in an artificially controlled setting is no guarantee it models reality, even in the slightest. This doesn’t even look like a good model, because the fish is movement constricted, and can’t change its depth.
I assume they are basing their work on this study, also from Australian National University:
==============================================================
Global Trends in Wind Speed and Wave Height
Science, Vol. 332 no. 6028 pp. 451-455 DOI: 10.1126/science.1197219
- I. R. Young*, S. Zieger, A. V. Babanin
*To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: ir.young@anu.edu.au
Studies of climate change typically consider measurements or predictions of temperature over extended periods of time. Climate, however, is much more than temperature. Over the oceans, changes in wind speed and the surface gravity waves generated by such winds play an important role. We used a 23-year database of calibrated and validated satellite altimeter measurements to investigate global changes in oceanic wind speed and wave height over this period. We find a general global trend of increasing values of wind speed and, to a lesser degree, wave height, over this period. The rate of increase is greater for extreme events as compared to the mean condition.
Then there’s this little gem in the paper:
That paper is contested on the basis of that table:
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/334/6058/905.2.abstract
Comment on “Global Trends in Wind Speed and Wave Height”
Frank J. Wentz*, Lucrezia Ricciardulli
Young et al. (Reports, 22 April 2011, p. 451) reported trends in global mean wind speed much larger than found by other investigators. Their report fails to reference these other investigations and does not discuss the consequences that such large wind trends would have on global evaporation and precipitation. The difference between their altimeter and buoy trends suggests a relatively large trend error.
=============================================================
Of course this new paper on waves make fish swim harder [Unsteady flow affects swimming energetics in a labriform fish (Cymatogaster aggregata) ] from ANU is published in the same journal (Journal of Experimental Biology) that says ocean acidification will make damselfish go blind: Ocean acidification will interfere with fish eyes
But what I find most interesting is that the original abstract doesn’t even MENTION climate change:
==============================================================
Unsteady flow affects swimming energetics in a labriform fish (Cymatogaster aggregata)
Abstract
Unsteady water flows are common in nature, yet the swimming performance of fishes is typically evaluated at constant, steady speeds in the laboratory. We examined how cyclic changes in water flow velocity affect the swimming performance and energetics of a labriform swimmer, the shiner surfperch, Cymatogaster aggregata, during station holding. Using intermittent-flow respirometry, we measured critical swimming speed (Ucrit), oxygen consumption rates (ṀO2) and pectoral fin use in steady flow versus unsteady flows with either low- [0.5 body lengths (BL) s−1] or high-amplitude (1.0 BL s−1) velocity fluctuations, with a 5 s period. Individuals in low-amplitude unsteady flow performed as well as fish in steady flow. However, swimming costs in high-amplitude unsteady flow were on average 25.3% higher than in steady flow and 14.2% higher than estimated values obtained from simulations based on the non-linear relationship between swimming speed and oxygen consumption rate in steady flow. Time-averaged pectoral fin use (fin-beat frequency measured over 300 s) was similar among treatments. However, measures of instantaneous fin use (fin-beat period) and body movement in high-amplitude unsteady flow indicate that individuals with greater variation in the duration of their fin beats were better at holding station and consumed less oxygen than fish with low variation in fin-beat period. These results suggest that the costs of swimming in unsteady flows are context dependent in labriform swimmers, and may be influenced by individual differences in the ability of fishes to adjust their fin beats to the flow environment.
=============================================================
So, maybe the whole climate change meme is an addition for the purposes of press release, to gain attention, either way, it all seems fishy to me.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
What will they come up with next. Something like hangnails are caused by climate change?
I presume these experts have never studied fish in the fishes habitat, actually snorkelled, scuba dived or even swum in the ocean?
Must be the superior science of modelling reality, while ignoring what actually happens.
Perhaps their research methods would be enhanced by them taking a privately funded excursion to Break-Kneck Beach on Maui, where this very wave action makes the beach what it is.
It is frightening when any random surfer, understands a subject better than a government scientist.
Best case for more funding cuts.
At first I thought this hilarious. And then I thought this research money could be used instead for cancer research.
“So, maybe the whole climate change meme is an addition for the purposes of press release, to gain attention,..”
bingo. just like using keywords lifted from the job posting to get your resume located by searchbots.
A most remarkable finding when hurricanes/cyclones are at a 33 year low though we have the “hottest decade” on record!
When its models all the way down, who needs evidence?! Aristotelians!
Anyone want to restore the scientific method? See Richard Feynman on scientific integrity in Cargo Cult Science 1974 Caltech.
““It’s harder to constantly switch speeds than it is to remain at a constant speed, like a runner changing between running and walking during interval training versus a steady jog. Well, it’s the same for swimming fish,” says Mr Roche.”
Mr. Roche’s stumble over the blindingly obvious has, as an unforeseen consequence, also described one impact of high-penetration intermittent renewable energy on fossil fuel power plants.
OMG: Waves don’t impact the flow of water under the surface! What is their PhD in? (decided not to answer my own question since it would probably violate a ton of rules about being nice)
i have to say that this renders me speechless. The absurdity of this experiment has me absolutely gobsmacked. The good thing is that it’s absurdity is self-evident, except maybe to those who got the funding for it and those approving the funding. Wow. Just wow.
If the fish have a harder time moving about, so does their prey and being exhausted it will be easier to catch, giving the fish more energy more easily.
Nature is amazingly well balanced. Shrill alarmists, not so much.
Chris y, What in the world is Roche smoking? Swimming is not like running at all! Fails at fluid dynamics. Is clueless on physic of motion in organisms. Has no idea about currents (vs waves). And this I assume was peer reviewed. Maybe someone should have checked if the peers were awake during their review!
Why would the fish want to swim at constant speed? Why would the fish not want to ‘go with the flow’?
So 12 wind/wave buoys around the world is enough to determine global trends?
Let’s get rid of 99.9% of all thermometers.
Seriously? Have they really absolutely nothing better to do? I seem to recall fish farms these days are moored out at sea so that the fish have to deal with the natural currents, & grow stronger accordingly, instead of just being in a salt-water tank as many used to be! Why didn’t they just simply ask a grown-up? It would have saved a small fortune!
Billy Liar says:
February 5, 2014 at 9:21 am
So 12 wind/wave buoys around the world is enough to determine global trends?
Let’s get rid of 99.9% of all thermometers.
They already did… 🙁
This looks like a candidate for one of those silly-science awards.
I guess I should explain some of the absurdities in this piece. I grew up in Nova Scotia, my house being about 100 yards from St Mary’s bay. Any 5th grader from down there will know the following.
– Waves occur where the water meets the shore. Away from land, the undulations of the water surface are swells. They are completely different phenomenon.
– Swells and waves are both surface phenomenon. The ocean has something called “depth” where the surface phenomenon has little to no direct effect.
– if the surface is too rough, fish need simply to swim a bit further down in the water column to avoid swells, or away from the shoreline to avoid waves. So “adaptations” to rough seas is part of their innate make up as fish. Is this not self-evident? It’s called “evolution”.
– Swells are up and down undulations. They are not side to side “waves”. A floating object will go up and down with the swell, not sideways. If they go sideways it isn’t because of the swell or the “wave”. It is a function of current. Which is another thing altogether.
Tos imply talk about waves in the context of the study is absurd.
As some who has actually designed and maintained aquariums simulating extreme natural environments I would give this effort an F … if done by High School students. This little box does not even come close to simulating the amount or type of water movement surf fishes encounter naturally. And the idea that fish will be trying to maintain a constant speed is ludicrous. The light unnaturally coming in from the sides of this stupid experiment will have more of an effect on the fishes behavior then just about any other factor.
6 Amazing Functions Ocean Waves Perform for the Earth.
1. Create beaches
2. Waves pound rocks and erode them
3. Increase adaptability and strength of creatures
4. Increasing biodiversity
5. At the surface, exchange of climate gases occur
6. Stabilizing climate temperatures
http://www.environmentalgraffiti.com/news-amazing-photographs-waves
What a painful read. They don’t even know that fish can surf!
I want a refund. Simulating current in that manner produces a vortex. Where the hell is PETA!
Sarc/
“Darwin’s theories of the survival of the fittest and evolution apply here. Because of the waves breaking onto the coast, sea creatures there take the hardest hits and need to be stronger and more adaptable. Along with number 4, waves “maintain a gradient of biodiversity all the way from the surface, down to depths of 30m or more. Without waves, there would not be as many species living in the sea”.”
what about flying fish? more wind? bad or good?
Oh! Meatier fish ‘n’ chips, you say?
*grabs malt vinegar*
When they measured the amount of energy expended by the fish did they account for the increase in heart rate caused by the sound of the scientists adjusting that Cuisinart from blend to puree and back?
I don’t know if I am going to laugh or cry. I sure wish I had looked at all those little packages in my cereal boxes. I could have had a PhD and didn’t even realize it. But, putting a fish in a plastic box and messing with it, while it may have been fun, doesn’t give us anything new to think about. A friend remarked to me about the recent floods in Colorado. The streams looked like an atomic bomb had gone off, but, apparently when the Division of Wildlife checked after the flood, surprise, the fish were still there. As was remarked above; blindingly obvious finding. what a joke!