Side of bends or other certain lateral position. However, it should be noted that the hydrodynamic model estimated substantial secondary circulation in bends on the San Joaquin River upstream of the junction. In the rheotaxis behavior formulation, every particle was assigned a static rheotaxis speed for the duration in the simulation. Because the speed drawn varies among particles, this behavior resulted within a bigger longitudinal spread in particles (Figure 5d) but no improve in lateral spreading relative to passive particles (Figure 5a). Since the imply from the rheotaxis speed distribution (Figure four) was positive (upstream swimming), rheotaxis commonly results in slower imply downstream transport relative to passive particles. In the CRW behavior, each particle updated its swimming speed and direction at a 5-s time interval. This resulted inside a more dispersed particle distribution (Figure 5e) relative to passive particles (Figure 5b), especially in the lateral direction. The combined behavior integrated surface orientation, rheotaxis plus a CRW. It resulted inside the most dispersed distribution by combining the strong longitudinal spreading related Water 2021, 13, FOR PEER REVIEWwith variable rheotaxis and horizontal spreading related with all the CRW (Figure 5f). of 16 13 three.4. Swimming Behavior Evaluation The route selection of the tagged salmon smolts was particles stick to a route conis most likely to disperse particles and steer clear of instances in which no strongly dependent on entry place (Figureassociated tag. Higher likelihood metrics have been also related with sursistent using the 6a). Nevertheless, for a given entry position, either route is possible. For example, tags which enter river correct (the best support for those behaviors. A notable face orientation and rheotaxis indicating some side in the river for an observer 20(S)-Hydroxycholesterol web looking downstream) occasionally have Old River overestimate head of Old River route selection trend on the particle-tracking results is toroute choice, which may be expected during periods of flow reversal around the San Joaquin River (Figure 2). The route selection of indi(Table 1). This could be on account of imprecise predictions of flow into every junction, which is viduals controlled by boundary conditions using measured flow observations which strongly(particles) with Nitrocefin Data Sheet active behavior (Figure 6b) was much less uniform than passive particle route choice for given entry place. estimated 1000 choice may possibly also be influenced themselves may perhaps beaimprecise. The bias in Given that routeparticles had been introduced at every entry location, the efficiency route selection might be Old River downstream in the diffluby decrease detectiontagged fishof the acoustic array inviewed as a person realization of route choice for any provided entry location. diffluence resulted in exclusion from the daence. Lack of detection downstream of theThe route choice of every single particle includes a degree of in this analysis, to random components of swimming which includes River route in taset usedstochasticity dueleading to under-representation of tags with Oldthe speeds and directions chosen inside a estimated HOR Bias metric is for the chosen and the distance to the dataset. The lowest CRW formulation, the rheotaxis speedsurface orientation and rhethe surface. Stochasticity in route selection can also be contributed by the diffusion term on the otaxis behavior. particle-tracking model representing the impact of turbulent motions.Figure six. Entry points and connected route selection.