{"paper_id":"259d0cbb-de07-4515-9e62-b3e0c65e6297","body_text":"1 \n  Collective movement of schooling fish reduces locomotor cost in turbulence 1 \n 2 \nYangfan Zhang1*, Hungtang Ko2, Michael Calicchia3, Rui Ni3, George V. Lauder1 3 \n 4 \n1Department of Organismic and Evolutionary Biology, Harvard University, 26 Oxford St, 5 \nCambridge, Massachusetts, 02138, USA    6 \n2Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Princeton University, Olden St., 7 \nPrinceton, New Jersey, 08540, USA   8 \n3Department of Mechanical Engineering, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD-21218, 9 \nUSA 10 \n 11 \n 12 \n 13 \n*Corresponding author. Email: yangfan_zhang@fas.harvard.edu 14 \n 15 \n 16 \n 17 \n 18 \n 19 \n 20 \n 21 \nShort title: Fish schools as turbulence shelter  22 \n 23 \n 24 \n  25 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n2 \nAbstract (233 words):  26 \nThe ecological and evolutionary benefits of collective behaviours are rooted in the physical 27 \nprinciples and physiological mechanisms underpinning animal locomotion. We propose a 28 \nturbulence sheltering hypothesis that collective movements of fish schools in turbulent flow can 29 \nreduce the total energetic cost of locomotion by shielding individuals from the perturbation of 30 \nchaotic turbulent eddies. We test this hypothesis by quantifying energetics and kinematics in 31 \nschools of giant danio (Devario aequipinnatus) compared to solitary individuals swimming 32 \nunder control and turbulent conditions over a wide speed range. We discovered that, when 33 \nswimming at high speeds and high turbulence levels, fish schools reduced their total energy 34 \nexpenditure (TEE, both aerobic and anaerobic energy) by 63–79% compared to solitary fish. 35 \nSolitary individuals spend ~25% more kinematic effort (tail beat amplitude*frequency) to swim 36 \nin turbulence at higher speeds than in control conditions. However, fish schools swimming in 37 \nturbulence reduced their three-dimensional group volume by 41–68% (at higher speeds) and did 38 \nnot alter their kinematic effort compared to control conditions. This substantial energy saving 39 \nhighlighted a ~261% higher TEE when fish swimming alone in turbulence are compared to 40 \nswimming in a school. Schooling behaviour could mitigate turbulent disturbances by sheltering 41 \nfish within schools from the eddies of sufficient kinetic energy that can disrupt the locomotor 42 \ngaits. Providing a more desirable internal hydrodynamic environment could be one of the 43 \necological drivers underlying collective behaviours in a dense fluid environment.  44 \n 45 \nOne-Sentence Summary:  46 \n 47 \nThe collective movement of fish schools substantially reduces the energetic cost of locomotion 48 \nin turbulence compared to that of swimming alone. 49 \n 50 \n  51 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n3 \n Introduction  52 \nNearly all animal species live with ubiquitous turbulent air or water in nature (1) (2) (3) 53 \n(4). Hence, turbulent flows affect many aspects of animal biology that are fundamental to 54 \nlifetime fitness, including dispersal and spawning, the cost of moving for both regional 55 \nlocomotion and long-distance migration, and the dynamics of predator-prey interactions  (5). In 56 \nparticular, chaotic turbulent flows (6) (7) (8) directly subject solitary individuals to unpredictable 57 \nfluid fields and alter body kinematics. For animal species that routinely interact with ambient 58 \nflow and perceive their fluid environment, when visual input on incoming turbulent flow is 59 \nlimited, individual animals may have limited sensory input and less anticipatory time to adjust 60 \nbody motion on short time scales. Under such challenging conditions, individual animals may 61 \nhave few options for mitigating the energetic costs of living and moving in turbulence.  62 \nThis challenge is especially formidable for aquatic life in natural channels of rivers and 63 \ncoastal seas (9) (10) (11) (12), because water is 50 times more viscous than air (13) (14) (5) (15) 64 \nand exerts larger perturbing forces on fish. Moving in turbulence is particularly challenging and 65 \nenergetically expensive for solitary fish. Solitary creek chub (Semotilus atromaculatus) 66 \nswimming in turbulence reduced maximum sustained swimming speed (by 22%) because large 67 \nturbulent eddies (~76% of body length) disrupt the movement trajectories of fish (14). Also, the 68 \ncost of locomotion by solitary Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar) can increase by ~150% in 69 \nturbulence (16). Studies on animal locomotion and turbulence have profound implications for a 70 \nbetter understanding of the planetary ecosystem, e.g., turbulence generated by groups of fish can 71 \ncontribute to vertical mixing of the ocean (17) (18) (19). Despite the widespread interest in 72 \nunderstanding how fish interact with turbulence (5) (14) (15) (18) (20) (21) (22) (23) (24) (25) 73 \n(26) (19) (27) (21) and the ubiquitous interactions of animals and their turbulent fluid 74 \nenvironments, no previous study has investigated the effects of turbulent flow on fish schools. 75 \nThis can be due to the complexity of turbulent flow and the dynamic nature of collective animal 76 \nmotion. Could the collective movement of fish schools mitigate the effects of turbulent flow by 77 \nalternating their locomotor characteristics? 78 \nFish schools could modulate oncoming turbulent flow through the coordination of nearby 79 \nindividuals. Nearly all fish could modify the local fluid environment through vortices shed by 80 \ntheir undulatory body motion, and by acting as nearby solid surfaces (28) (29) (30) (31) (32). A 81 \nschool of fishes could reduce the intensity and length scale of oncoming turbulent eddies within 82 \nthe school (Fig. 1). Hence, we propose a “turbulence sheltering hypothesis” that a fish school can 83 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n4 \nshield individuals within the group from ambient turbulence (Fig. 1). If this hypothesis holds, a 84 \nkey prediction is that collective movement reduces the total energy expenditure per unit of 85 \nbiomass compared to that of a solitary individual under the same flow conditions. This study 86 \nfocuses on testing this hypothesis experimentally. 87 \n Vertebrates use both aerobic and non-aerobic metabolic energy to support their total 88 \nenergy expenditure (TEE) during locomotion. Aerobic metabolism primarily supports energy use 89 \nat slower and steady locomotion, while glycolytic metabolism supplies faster and unsteady state 90 \nhigh-speed movement (33). Not only do the physiological mechanisms underpinning locomotion 91 \nshift with speed, but fluid drag also scales as the square of fluid velocity. Hence, increased 92 \nswimming speeds physically require substantially more metabolic energy. The characterization 93 \nof a locomotor performance curve (TEE as a function of speed) (34) under both turbulent and 94 \ncontrol conditions will test the working hypothesis that fish schools could mitigate the expected 95 \nincrease in the energetic cost of moving in turbulence. To test this hypothesis, we directly 96 \nquantified the locomotor performance curve for both solitary individuals and schools of eight 97 \ngiant danio (Devario aequipinnatus) across a wide range of speeds from 0.3 to 8 body lengths 98 \nsec-1.  We measured whole-animal aerobic energy expenditure (oxidative phosphorylation) 99 \nduring swimming, as well as excess post-exercise O2 consumption (EPOC) to quantify non-100 \naerobic energy expenditure after swimming (high-energy phosphates and substrate-level 101 \nphosphorylation) (35) (36) (37). In addition, we simultaneously quantified the kinematics of 102 \nindividual fish and those within schools, and measured three-dimensional school volumes to 103 \ncharacterize how fish responded to both control and turbulent flow environment. 104 \nResults 105 \nHydrodynamics of turbulent conditions 106 \n Turbulent flows (generated by a passive turbulence grid) exhibit strong fluctuations and 107 \nchaotic patterns (Fig. 2 A,B) in contrast to controlled flows (generated by a flow straightener).  108 \nQuantitatively, turbulent testing conditions showed sustainably greater maximum velocity (F1,107 109 \n= 401.9, p < 0.001, Fig. 2C), maximum vorticity (F1,107 = 167.8, p < 0.001, Fig. 2D), and 110 \nmaximum (Fig. 2E) and sum shear strength (F1,107 ≥ 153.7, p < 0.001, Fig. 2F). Since turbulence 111 \nwas generated by passing the flow through a passive grid, greater turbulence was reached at 112 \nhigher mean flows; similar rise of values of all these parameters in control flow condition was 113 \nalso observed, but with a greatly reduced rate of increase with velocity (Fig. 2).  In addition, the 114 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n5 \nprobability density function (p.d.f) of flow velocity along the swimming direction (u) and 115 \nperpendicular direction (v) showed the broadening of p.d.f (Fig. 3A & B), a clear indication of 116 \nintensified turbulence as speed increases. Since turbulence fluctuation velocity increases 117 \napproximately linearly with the mean flow speed (Fig. 3C), the resulting turbulence intensity, 118 \ndefined as the ratio between the two, remains nearly constant over the flow speeds studied. 119 \nEddies of various sizes can differentially impact the energetics of fish locomotion.  The 120 \nundulatory motion of fish can respond to eddies smaller than fish size, whereas eddies 121 \ncomparable to the body size may have sufficient energy to change the fish’s movement 122 \ntrajectory, which could result in increased energy expenditure. However, turbulence is notorious 123 \nfor its wide spectrum of scales, which can be quantified by the largest (integral scale) and the 124 \nsmallest (Kolmogorov scale), shown as two separate lines with the range in between showing the 125 \nfull range (Fig. 3D). Based on the energy cascade framework of turbulence eddy scale, the large 126 \neddies at the integral length scale (L) were comparable to the fish body depth (D) and are 127 \ncapable of energetically challenging fish locomotion (Fig. 1, 3).  128 \n 129 \nEnergetics of collective movement 130 \n We discovered that aerobic metabolic rate – speed curves of fish schools and solitary 131 \nindividuals both are concave upward in turbulence across the entire 0.3–7 BL s-1 speed range 132 \n(Fig. 4). We demonstrate that turbulent flow has resulted in upshifted aerobic metabolic rate – 133 \nspeed curves of solitary individuals across the entire speed range (F1, 69=4.45, p=0.0003) 134 \ncompared to locomotion by fish schools. In particular, the energetic cost of swimming was 32% 135 \nlower at 6 BL s-1 in schools compared to individuals swimming alone in turbulence (719.3 vs 136 \n1055 mg O2 kg-1 h-1, F1,69 = 4.1, p = 0.0015, Fig. 4A). Aerobic energy conservation enabled by 137 \nschooling dynamics is more pronounced at the higher speeds when the energy demands are at a 138 \npremium. 139 \nBecause fish body musculature operating at high frequencies during locomotion at high 140 \nspeed mostly uses white muscle fibres powered in part through glycolysis (38) (39), we predict 141 \nthat the schooling dynamics should also conserve non-aerobic energy (estimated by EPOC) and 142 \nreduce the recovery time when compared with solitary individuals. Indeed, the non-aerobic cost 143 \nfor fish schools to swim through the entire speed range in turbulence was nearly 8-fold lower 144 \nthan that of solitary individuals (EPOC: 0.68 vs 5.4 mg O2, t=7.0, p=0.0005, Fig. 4C).  Fish that 145 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n6 \nswam in schools recovered 1.8-fold faster than solitary individuals (EPOC duration: 11.8 vs 21.5 146 \nh, t=2.3, p=0.035).  147 \nAs a result, both total energetic expenditure (TEE) and total cost of transport (TCOT) of 148 \nfish schools was 62–79% lower than that of solitary individuals swimming in turbulence over the 149 \n3–7 BL s-1 range Fig. 4G).  Non-aerobic costs contribute 72–83 % of total energy consumption in 150 \nsolitary fish, whereas the non-aerobic contribution was only 20–40% in fish schools (Table S1). 151 \nIf non-aerobic locomotor costs are not accounted for, 75–177% of locomotor energy expenditure 152 \nin solitary individuals (Fig. 4D), and 251–800% of the energy expenditure in fish schools (Fig. 153 \n4E) would not have been accounted for. 154 \n Despite the substantial energy saving enabled by fish schooling in turbulence compared 155 \nto swimming in the same turbulent environment alone, fish schools do not completely eliminate 156 \nthe effects of turbulence on locomotor cost. After accounting for both aerobic and non-aerobic 157 \nenergy costs, we discovered that the TEE of fish schools swimming in turbulence was 51–76% 158 \nhigher (F1, 7=54.3,  p ≤ 0.0072, Fig. 4F) than the cost for fish schools swimming under control 159 \n(low turbulence) hydrodynamic conditions over the speed range of 5–7 BL s-1, and TCOT of fish 160 \nschools was 68 and 76% higher in turbulence than in control low-turbulence flow (F1, 91=36.2,  p 161 \n≤ 0.007) at 6 and 7 BL s-1 respectively (Fig. 4G). The proportional increase in the total energetic 162 \ncost of swimming in turbulence is again mostly from non-aerobic energy production. 163 \nNevertheless, the magnitude of the increased total costs of swimming in turbulence is only a 164 \nfraction (9–24%) of the costs for solitary individuals. Solitary individuals spent 190–342% 165 \nhigher total energy swimming in turbulence across the speed range of 2.5–7 BL s-1 compared to 166 \nlocomotion in control fluid conditions (Fig. 4F, G).  167 \nKinematics 168 \nUsing high-speed videography, we discovered that, as speed increases to speeds >1.7 BL 169 \ns-1, school volume becomes smaller, and the 3-D convex hull representing school volume is 170 \nreduced by 74% as individuals within the school swim in closer proximity (F12,143 = 11.74, p < 171 \n0.0001). Over the speed range of 1.7–7 BL s-1, fish schools become denser and form a prolate 172 \nspheroid shape compared to the streamlined school structure when fish schools swim in 173 \ncontrolled flows of the same speed. The 3-D convex hull volume of fish schools swimming in 174 \nturbulent conditions is 40–68% lower than that for schools swimming in control conditions at 175 \nsimilar speeds (t1,8 ≥ 2.147, p ≤ 0.032, Fig. 5).  176 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n7 \nAlso, kinematics of individual fish (Tail beat frequency, ftail; tail beat amplitude, Amptail; 177 \nftail•Amptail) within schools swimming in turbulence were not different from when fish schools 178 \nswam in control flow conditions (Fig. 6F, MANOVA: F1,25 ≤ 0.028, p ≥ 0.868). However, 179 \nsolitary fish spend up to 22% more effort (estimated as tail beat frequency times amplitude, 180 \nf•Amptail) swimming in turbulence than for control flow locomotion (Fig. 6E, MANOVA: F1,28 ≥ 181 \n1.167, p ≤ 0.006). Solitary fish increase ftail at lower speeds (ANOVA: F1,575 ≥ 4.67, p ≤ 0.031, 182 \nFig. 6A) and also reducing Amptail (ANOVA: F1,639 ≥ 26.35, p < 0.001, Fig. 6C). As a result, 183 \nswimming effort remains the same at lower speeds when compared to solitary individuals 184 \nswimming in controlled flows, as indicated by both kinematics (f•Amp) (MANOVA: F1,28 = 185 \n1.167, p = 0.281) and energetics (Fig. 6F, ANOVA: F1,71 ≤ 1.23, p ≥ 0.96). As speed increases in 186 \nturbulence, solitary fish increase Amptail by 26% (Fig. 6C) (ANOVA: F14,639 = 3.69, p < 0.001), 187 \nand there is no further increase in ftail (Fig. 6A). Locomotor effort (Ftail•Amptail) increased with 188 \nspeed at a greater rate for individuals in turbulence compared to individuals swimming under 189 \ncontrol conditions over the range of speeds tested (ANOVA: F7,536 = 173.14 p ≤ 0.006, Fig. 6E).  190 \n 191 \nDiscussion 192 \nDespite the ubiquity of vertebrates moving in environments with turbulent flows, we 193 \nknow remarkably little about the energetic costs of moving in turbulence as a collective group 194 \ncompared to moving in the same conditions as a solitary individual. Hence, we integrate three 195 \nlines of evidence (energetics, individual kinematics, and schooling dynamics) and compare them 196 \nbetween fish schools and solitary individuals over the same speed range in turbulence. 197 \nOur results support the turbulence sheltering hypothesis. We first discovered that the 198 \ncollective movement of fish schools substantially dampens the effects of turbulence by 199 \ndownshifting the locomotor performance curve at higher speeds, compared to when solitary 200 \nindividuals swim in turbulence. Fish schools in turbulence expend up to 79% less energy than 201 \nfish under control conditions (Fig. 4F). One of the essential mechanisms by which fish schools 202 \ndampen turbulent disturbances is by collectively swimming in up to a 68% tighter schooling 203 \nformation compared to control conditions. As a result, fish swimming within schools showed no 204 \ndifference in their swimming kinematics regardless of whether the fish schools swim in 205 \nturbulence or control conditions. We also discovered that one of the key reasons for higher 206 \nlocomotor costs when solitary individuals swim in turbulence is the increase in tail beat 207 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n8 \namplitude (Amptail) at higher speeds (Fig. 6C), which increases the kinematic effort of swimming 208 \nas estimated by tail beat frequency times amplitude (f•Amptail) (Fig. 6E, F). As a result, the total 209 \nenergy expenditure (TEE) and total cost of transport for solitary individuals, including both the 210 \naerobic and non-aerobic energy contributions, are ~261% higher compared to when solitary 211 \nindividuals swim in control conditions (Fig. 4F, G). 212 \nTherefore, collective behaviour provides effective turbulence sheltering, not only 213 \nmitigating the kinematic responses needed in turbulent flow, but also providing a large energetic 214 \nadvantage by downshifting most of the locomotor performance curve. We highlight three key 215 \nconsiderations regarding collective movement in turbulent flows: 1) How does collective 216 \nmovement dampen the turbulent disturbance on locomotor energetics? 2) How do body 217 \nkinematic patterns act as a linchpin between fluid dynamic and energetic effects? 3) How does 218 \nthe hydrodynamic scale of turbulence relative to fish size matter for broader considerations of 219 \nfish locomotor ecology? 220 \n 221 \n1) Schooling dynamics dampens the effects of turbulence 222 \n Fish schools (i.e. giant danio) are effective at reducing the energetic costs of swimming in 223 \nturbulence. The TEE and TCOT of solitary individuals are 188–378% higher than that of fish 224 \nschools at higher speeds, per kilogram of biomass. By studying both aerobic and non-aerobic 225 \nlocomotor costs, we discovered that most of the energy saving stems from the reduced use of 226 \nnon-aerobic energy (Table S1 & S2). Specifically, fish schools swimming in turbulence 227 \ngenerated an 8-fold lower excess post-exercise oxygen consumption (EPOC, including the use of 228 \nhigh-energy phosphate stores and glycolytic energy contributions) than that of a solitary 229 \nindividual. The aerobic cost of swimming at higher speeds was also 47% higher in solitary 230 \nindividuals compared to that of fish schools. Collectively, over the entire range of swimming up 231 \nto maximum and sustained speeds, schooling dynamics effectively dampens the additional 232 \nmetabolic costs of moving in the turbulent flow by 3.8 folds (the integral area under the TEE 233 \ncurve of schools versus individuals in turbulence: 165.5 vs. 633.3 kj kg-1).  234 \nSolitary individuals increased tail beat frequency (ftail) but reduced tail beat amplitude 235 \n(Amptail) to compensate for turbulent disturbances at the lower speeds (≤ 43% critical swimming 236 \nspeed, Ucrit), which yielded the same kinematic effort (estimated as ftail•Amptail) as swimming 237 \nunder control flow conditions. As water velocity increases to ≥ 86% of Ucrit, solitary individuals 238 \ncan no longer increase ftail to compensate for the effects of turbulence. Instead, solitary 239 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n9 \nindividuals increased Amptail to compensate for the turbulent disturbances which increased 240 \nkinematic effort and reflected in substantially higher energetic cost. In contrast, schooling is 241 \nhighly effective at reducing the effects of turbulent eddies on fish kinematics within the school, 242 \nand fish within a school in turbulence move similarly to fish swimming in controlled flow. 243 \nBioenergetics is critical to understanding the cost of behaviours (40) (41) (42), and allows 244 \ndirect quantification of the amount of energy used to answer fundamental questions including 245 \n“How much does a behaviour cost?” and “How do altering environmental conditions affect this 246 \ncost?”. Energetic measurements are particularly useful in evaluating hypotheses involving 247 \nlocomotion occurring over a range of movement speeds and in comparison to control conditions.  248 \nThe kinematic effort of fish swimming (estimated as f•Amptail) suggested that energy saving by 249 \nschooling danio in turbulence is ~25%, whereas direct measurement of energy expenditure 250 \nshows a total energy saving of ~79%. Kinematic analyses typically use snapshots of body motion 251 \nof individuals to quantify biomechanical effort, but do not necessarily reflect total energy use, 252 \nparticularly when sampled intermittently during an incremental speed test. Our energetic 253 \nmeasurements detected that turbulent flow increased the total cost of locomotion of fish schools 254 \nby 51–76% at higher speeds compared to when fish schools swim in controlled flow conditions, 255 \nwhereas fish schools swimming in turbulent and control conditions showed no difference in tail 256 \nkinematics. Although understanding the biomechanics of locomotion and movement are essential 257 \nadjuncts to studying locomotion energetics, the cost of movement for any animal is also 258 \ngoverned by the underlying physiological mechanisms relating to the cardiorespiratory system, 259 \ncirculatory system, musculature and metabolic pathways that generate the ATP needed for 260 \nmovement. We thus advocate here for integrated studies of kinematics and energetics, and 261 \ncaution that kinematic studies alone may not reflect actual levels of energy use.  262 \n 263 \n2) Kinematics and schooling dynamics in turbulence 264 \n To better understand the interactions between fish kinematics and fluid dynamics, we 265 \ncharacterized Strouhal number (St, dimensionless undulatory propulsive effort at a movement 266 \nspeed) (43) (44) and Reynolds number (Re, dimensionless fluid speed showing the ratio between 267 \ninertial and viscous forces) (13). Regardless of whether solitary individuals or fish schools swim 268 \nin controlled or turbulent conditions, the St ranged 0.25–0.35 (Fig. 7A). The general relationship 269 \nof St and Re is independent of added turbulence and whether or not fish swim within a school. 270 \nThe general relationship of Re and St (the log-log linear relationship, Fig. 7A) falls in the 271 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n10 \nvicinity of a general scaling hypothesis for aquatic undulatory locomotion (45). However, these 272 \ndata show that even in the turbulent flows giant danios maintain the linear relationship between 273 \nSt and Re instead of transitioning to a different relationship as proposed by the previous scaling 274 \nhypothesis (45). It is possible that, if the Re of locomotion is increased beyond Re > 105 (e.g. 275 \nlarger species moving at faster speeds), the relationship of Re and St could change, but our data 276 \ndo not support the previously suggested scaling of locomotor St and Re in turbulence. Future 277 \nlaboratory studies are needed to better inform the relationship of Re and St across a wide range 278 \nof swimming velocities in turbulent conditions that are ubiquitous in nature.  279 \nSince our data collapse onto a single scaling relationship (Fig. 7A), how can we explain 280 \nthe difference in metabolic rates between turbulent and control conditions? As a completed swim 281 \noscillatory body wave typically starts from the head of the fish, hence we tracked the oscillation 282 \nat the nostril region of the fish head (oscillatory amplitude as a function of time) to examine the 283 \nfluid conditions surrounding the fish. We reason that locations within a school can reduce the 284 \nturbulent disturbances that would otherwise increase locomotor costs for solitary fish. 285 \nIndividuals swimming alone under controlled conditions show a regular pattern of head 286 \noscillation frequency and near-constant oscillation amplitude (Fig. 7B, blue wave). However, the 287 \nhead oscillations of solitary individuals in turbulent flows are irregular and of varying frequency 288 \n(Fig. 7B, purple wave). Individuals within a school swimming in turbulence have rhythmical 289 \nhead oscillations and more distinct peaks than those under turbulent conditions (Fig. 7B, orange 290 \nwave), and the pattern of head oscillation is more like that of solitary individuals swimming in 291 \ncontrol flow conditions. The benefit of swimming within a school is most likely the result of the 292 \ntighter schooling formation as fish schooling volumes are reduced in turbulent flows. Smaller 293 \ninter-individual distances allow the myriad of hydrodynamic mechanisms that are associated 294 \nwith reduced cost of locomotion to become effective, including fish swimming side-by-side, in 295 \nfront and behind other fish, and in the reduced velocity zone behind two fish (34) (46) (32) (47) 296 \n(48). These results suggest that fish schools act as effective “shelters” that enhance 297 \nhydrodynamic mechanisms that reduce locomotor cost, a strategy that is not available to 298 \nindividual fish swimming alone in turbulence.  299 \nAs a topic for future investigation, we suggest that the fish schools could alter the size 300 \nscale of turbulent eddies within the school and thus reduce the impact that environmental 301 \nperturbations have on the cost of individuals swimming. Fish schools could function as band-302 \npass filters as a result of their undulatory body motion and the proximity of individuals within 303 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n11 \nthe school to each other. This collective undulatory movement could create a more predictable 304 \nflow field within the group that reduces kinematic efforts and swimming costs compared to 305 \nindividuals swimming alone in turbulence.  306 \nMeasuring flow conditions within a school would provide a more direct and detailed 307 \nunderstanding of how turbulent eddies within fish schools are modified in comparison to the 308 \nfree-stream turbulent flow field. However, this is currently a considerable experimental and 309 \ntechnical challenge. Even when using multiple laser light sheets or volumetric approaches to 310 \nilluminate flow within a school, the bodies of fish in a dense school inevitably cast shadows and 311 \nhinder the resolution of imaging turbulent flow within the school. In the absence of direct 312 \nmeasurements for within-school flow fields, kinematic and energetic data provide the best 313 \navailable evidence for the turbulence sheltering hypothesis. 314 \n 315 \n3) Turbulence length scale and fish ecology 316 \nTurbulent disturbances on animal movement are multifaceted and context-specific. 317 \nTurbulent flows are chaotic and unpredictable by fish, and contain energy over a wide spectral 318 \nrange (Figs. 2, 3), which differs from a Kármán vortex wake where a solitary fish can interact 319 \nwith a regular and predictable pattern of oncoming vortices (49).  Fish swimming in a Kármán 320 \nvortex street can save energy by tuning their body dynamics to interact with oncoming vortices, 321 \nand greatly reduce their muscle activity and energetic cost (3) (50). When fish are exposed to the 322 \ntrue chaotic turbulent flow with a length scale on the same order of magnitude of body size, as in 323 \nthe experiments presented here, the energetic cost of locomotion greatly increases.  324 \nDemonstrating the reduction in the total cost of locomotion in turbulence by group 325 \ndynamics in aquatic vertebrates has direct implications for the movement ecology of migratory 326 \nspecies. For example, a “feast-or-famine” life history is common to many migratory species. 327 \nFood availability can be scarce and fluctuate during the migration journey (51). Migratory (fish) 328 \nspecies typically accumulate energy and nutrients during the feeding season prior to undertaking 329 \na long migration. As a result, migratory species often rely on a finite number of onboard stores of 330 \nmetabolic substrates to fuel migration. We demonstrated here that the total cost of transport 331 \nwhen fish schools move through turbulence is substantially decreased. Thus, fish schools should 332 \nmigrate a longer distance for the same amount of energy. By migrating in a collective group, as 333 \nmany fish species do, fish should be able to sustain migration against unexpected costs 334 \nassociated with changing environmental stressors such as heat, hypoxic episodes, and storms. 335 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n12 \nFish encounter turbulence not only in natural environments as a result of rapid stream 336 \nflows, bottom topography, or obstacles in the water, but also under conditions where human-337 \ndesigned structures such as dams or fish passage structures create turbulence (52) (53) (54). A 338 \nkey issue in considering how fish must contend with these structures is understanding the length 339 \nscale of turbulence encountered by fishes and whether or not fish prefer and could even benefit 340 \nfrom a turbulent environment (55). Our experiments utilized a passive turbulence grid to 341 \ngenerate turbulent eddies with a length scale approximating the body depth of the giant danio 342 \nstudied.  In nature, however, turbulent flows can differ in the turbulence length scale, and in the 343 \nenergy present at each eddy size, and variations in turbulence scale can be important for 344 \nunderstanding the effects of turbulence on animals of different sizes. It remains unknown if fish 345 \n(either individuals or schools) select particular turbulent length scales when swimming that could 346 \nalso allow locomotor energy savings in contrast to the increased costs demonstrated at other 347 \nlength scales. Perhaps the design of fish passage devices for habitat restoration should consider 348 \nthe ratio of turbulence eddy scale relative to the animal size to improve locomotor ability and 349 \nreduce the cost of movement for fish (52). Alternatively, energetically costly turbulence flow 350 \ngenerators could serve as aquatic barriers to perturb invasive species.  351 \n 352 \nGiven the ubiquity of turbulent flows in natural aquatic ecosystems, we suggest that one 353 \nof the important roles of collective behaviour in fish species is to shelter individuals within a 354 \ncollective group from challenging hydrodynamic conditions. More broadly, our study proposes 355 \nthat vertebrate collectives can also function as a larger size biological entity than the solitary 356 \nindividual, which could reduce the effect of turbulence perturbation on animal movement. Using 357 \naquatic vertebrates moving in the dense water fluid as a model system to directly demonstrate 358 \nenergy saving can be the foundation for future studies of the ‘turbulence sheltering’ hypothesis in 359 \nflying and terrestrial vertebrates. Locomotor performance curves, where metabolic or kinematic 360 \nvariables are evaluated against swimming speed, are a useful comparative framework to broadly 361 \nunderstand the energetic cost of collective movement (34). 362 \n 363 \nMaterials and Methods 364 \nExperimental animals 365 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n13 \nExperiments were performed on giant danio (Devario aequipinnatus) that were acquired 366 \nfrom a local commercial supplier near Boston, Massachusetts USA. Five schooling groups are 367 \nrandomly distributed and housed separately in five 37.9 l aquaria (n=8 per tank). The five 368 \nsolitary individuals are housed separately in five 9.5 l aquaria (n=1 per tank). All aquaria have 369 \nself-contained thermal control (28 °C), an aeration system (>95 % air saturation, % sat.) and a 370 \nfiltration system. Water changes (up to 50% exchange ratio) were carried out weekly. Fish were 371 \nfed ad libitum daily (TetraMin, Germany). Animal holding and experimental procedures were 372 \napproved by the Harvard Animal Care IACUC Committee (protocol number 20-03-3). 373 \n  374 \nExperimental system – Integrated Biomechanics & Bioenergetic Assessment System (IBAS) 375 \nThe experimental system and similar experimental protocols are available in (56). To 376 \npromote reproducibility, we reiterate the methodologies in detail and the additional experimental 377 \ndetail specific to the study of collective movement in turbulent conditions. 378 \nThe core of our experimental system is a 9.35-l (respirometry volume plus tubing) 379 \ncustomized Loligo® swim-tunnel respirometer (Tjele, Denmark). The respirometer has an 380 \nelectric motor, and a sealed shaft attached to a propeller located inside the respirometer. By 381 \nregulating the revolutions per minute (RPM) of the motor, the water velocity of the motor can be 382 \ncontrolled.  383 \nThe swim-tunnel respirometer is oval-shaped. The central hollow space of the respirometry 384 \nincreases the turning radius of the water current. As a result, the water velocity passing the cross-385 \nsection of the swimming section (80 × 80 × 225 mm) is more homogenous (validated by PIV). 386 \nMoreover, a honeycomb flow straightener (80 × 80 × 145 mm) is installed in upstream of the 387 \nswimming section to create laminar flow (validated by PIV). The linear regression equation 388 \nbetween RPM and water velocity (V) of control flow is established (V = 0.06169•RPM – 5.128, 389 \nR2 = 0.9988, p < 0.0001) by velocity field measured by particle image velocimetry (PIV). 390 \nTo increase the signal-to-noise ratio for the measurement of water dissolved O2, a water 391 \nhomogenous loop is installed 95 cm downstream of the propeller and the water is returned to the 392 \nrespirometer 240 cm before the swimming section. The flow in the water homogenous loop 393 \nmoves (designated in-line circulation pump, Universal 600, EHEIM GmbH & Co KG, Deizisau, 394 \nGermany) in the same direction as the water flow in the swimming tunnel. A high-resolution 395 \nfibre optic O2 probe (Robust oxygen probe OXROB2, PyroScience GmbH, Aachen, Germany) is 396 \nsealed in the homogenous loop at downstream of the circulation pump (better mixing) to 397 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n14 \ncontinuously measure the dissolved O2 level in the water (recording frequency ~1 Hz, response 398 \ntime < 15s). The oxygen probe was calibrated to anoxic (0 % sat., a solution created by super-399 \nsaturated sodium sulphite and bubbling nitrogen gas) and fully aerated water (100 % sat.). The 400 \nbackground ṀO2 in the swim-tunnel respirometer was measured for 20 min before and after each 401 \ntrial. The average background ṀO2 (< 6% of fish ṀO2) was used to correct for the ṀO2 of fish. 402 \nThe pre-filtered water (laboratory grade filtration system) is constantly disinfected by UV light 403 \n(JUP-01, SunSun, China) located in an external water reservoir to suppress the growth of 404 \nmicrobial. Water changes of 60% total volume occurred every other day and a complete 405 \ndisinfection by sodium hypochlorite is conducted weekly (Performance bleach, Clorox & 1000 406 \nppm). 407 \nTo simultaneously measure schooling dynamics and swimming kinematics, the customized 408 \noval-shaped swim-tunnel respirometer is located on a platform with an open window beneath the 409 \nswimming section. The platform is elevated 243 mm above the base to allow a front surface 410 \nmirror to be installed at a 45° angle. This mirror allows a high-speed camera (FASTCAM Mini 411 \nAX50 type 170K-M-16GB, Phontron Inc., United States, lens: Nikon 50mm F1.2, Japan) to 412 \nrecord the ventral view. The second camera (FASTCAM Mini AX50 type 170K-M-16GB, 413 \nPhontron Inc., United States, lens: Nikon 50mm F1.2, Japan) is positioned 515 mm to the side of 414 \nthe swimming section to record a lateral view. Synchronized lateral and ventral video recordings 415 \nwere made at 125 fps, and each frame was 1024 by 1024 pixels. To avoid light refraction passing 416 \nthrough the water and distorting the video recordings, the swim-tunnel respirometry is not 417 \nsubmerged in the water bath. Temperature regulation of the respirometer is achieved by 418 \nregulating room temperature, installing thermal insulation layers on the respirometry and 419 \nreplenishing the water inside the respirometer from a thermally regulated (28 °C, heater: ETH 420 \n300, Hydor, United States & chiller: AL-160, Baoshishan, China) water reservoir (insulated 421 \n37.9-l aquarium) located externally.  422 \nThe aerated (100% sat., air pump: whisper AP 300, Tetra, China) reservoir water is flushed 423 \n(pump: Universal 2400, EHEIM GmbH & Co KG, Deizisau, Germany) to the respirometer 424 \nthrough an in-line computer-controlled motorized ball valve (U.S. Solid) installed at the in-flow 425 \ntube. The other in-line one-way valve is installed at the out-flow tube. The out-flow tube is also 426 \nequipped with a valve. The value is shut during the measurement period, a precautionary practice 427 \nto eliminate the exchange of water between the respirometer and the external reservoir when the 428 \nwater moves at a high velocity inside the respirometer. This flushing was manually controlled to 429 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n15 \nmaintain DO above 80 % sat. Every time the respirometer was closed to measure ṀO2, the water 430 \ntemperature fluctuates no more than 0.2 °C. The water temperature inside the respirometer is 431 \nmeasured by a needle temperature probe (Shielded dipping probe, PyroScience GmbH, Aachen, 432 \nGermany) sealed through a tight rubber port of the respirometer.  433 \nTo allow fish to reach the undisturbed quiescent state during the trial, the entire Integrated 434 \nBiomechanics & Bioenergetic Assessment Platform (IBAP) is covered by laser blackout sheet 435 \n(Nylon Fabric with Polyurethane Coating; Thorlabs Inc, New Jersey, United States). The room 436 \nlights are shut off and foot traffic around the experimental rig is restrained to the absolute 437 \nminimum. Fish are orientated by dual small anterior spots of white light (lowest light intensity, 438 \nModel 1177, Cambridge Instruments Inc, New York, United States) for orientation (one to the 439 \ntop and the other to the side) of the swimming section. The test section is illuminated by infrared 440 \nlight arrays. 441 \n 442 \nCreating turbulent flows in swim-tunnel respirometer 443 \nWe used a passive turbulence grid (height × width: 7.5 × 8.6 cm) to generate the turbulence 444 \nflow for the swimming section in the swim-tunnel respirometer (Fig. S1). The turbulence grid 445 \nhas a configuration of 3 × 3 square openings (each opening is in 1.5 × 1.5 cm). The openings 446 \nproduce 9 streams of jets which mix and form turbulent flow. The turbulent grid is upstream of 447 \nthe swimming section (Fig. S1). The opening of the grid is guarded by thin metal wires to 448 \nprevent fish from going through. The turbulence grid is effective in generating turbulence, as 449 \nillustrated by the fluid dynamic features of the turbulences measured by PIV (see Fig. S2 and 450 \nFigs. 2 and 3). As a result, the linear regression equation between RPM and average water 451 \nvelocity (V) of turbulent flow is changed (V = 0.03515•RPM – 1.597, R2 = 0.9985, p < 0.0001) 452 \nand quantified by velocity field measured by particle image velocimetry (PIV) (see Fig. S3). 453 \nQuantifying average water velocity allowed us to match the swimming kinematics and metabolic 454 \nenergy consumption of tested fish at the same mean speed between control and turbulent flows. 455 \n 456 \nExperimental Protocol 457 \nThe same individuals or schools are repeatedly measured in laminar or turbulent flow to 458 \ncontrol for biological variations. Giant danio (Devario aequipinnatus) is a model species, 459 \ncapable of actively and directionally swimming from a minimum to maximum sustained speeds 460 \n(0.3–8.0 body lengths s-1; BL s-1 & Reynolds number range of 6.4•103 to 1.8•105 in controlled 461 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n16 \nflow). We studied five replicate schools and five replicate individuals drawn from within each 462 \nschool. Swimming performance test trials were conducted with Devario aequipinnatus fasted for 463 \n24 hours, a sufficient period for a small-sized species at 28 °C (i.e. high resting ṀO2) to reach an 464 \nabsorptive state. In fact, we observed no specific dynamic action, in the amount of oxygen 465 \nconsumed for digestion during the first diurnal cycle (Fig. S3). Prior to the swimming 466 \nperformance test, testing fish were gently weighted and placed in the swim-tunnel respirometer. 467 \nThe fish swam at 35% Ucrit for 30 mins to help oxidize the inevitable but minor lactate 468 \naccumulation during the prior handling and help fish become accustomed to the flow conditions 469 \nin the swim-tunnel respirometer (57). After this time, the fish to be tested were habituated (>20 470 \nhours) to the respirometer environment under quiescent and undisturbed conditions. During this 471 \ntime, we used an automatic system to measure the resting ṀO2 for at least 19 hours. Relays 472 \n(Cleware GmbH, Schleswig, Germany) and software (AquaResp v.3, Denmark) were used to 473 \ncontrol the intermittent flushing of the respirometer with fresh water throughout the trial to 474 \nensure O2 saturation of the respirometer water. ṀO2 was calculated from the continuously 475 \nrecorded dissolved O2 level (at 1 Hz) inside the respirometer chamber. The intermittent flow of 476 \nwater into the respirometer occurred over 930 s cycles with 30 s where water was flushed into 477 \nthe respirometer and 900 s where the pumps were off and the respirometer was a closed system. 478 \nThe first 240 s after each time the flushing pump was turned off were not used to measure ṀO2 479 \nto allow O2 levels inside the respirometer to stabilize. The remaining 660 s when the pumps were 480 \noff during the cycle were used to measure ṀO2. The in-line circulation pump for water in the O2 481 \nmeasurement loop stayed on throughout the trial. 482 \n We characterize the locomotor performance curve of fish using an established 483 \nincremental step-wise critical swimming speed (Ucrit) test (35). The first preliminary trial 484 \ndetermined the Ucrit of this population of Devario aequipinnatus as 8 BL s-1. Characterizing the 485 \nswimming performance curve required a second preliminary trial to strategically select 10 water 486 \nvelocities (0.3, 0.5, 0.8, 1.0, 1.3, 1.5, 1.8, 2.3, 2.8 BL s-1) to bracket the hypothesized concave 487 \nupward metabolism-speed curve at the lower speed (< 40% Ucrit). Additional five water 488 \nvelocities (3.8, 4.9, 5.9, 6.9, 8.0 BL s-1) are used to characterize the exponentially increasing 489 \ncurve to the maximum and sustained swimming speed, Ucrit (see Fig. S5). Altogether, 14 points 490 \nprovide a reliable resolution to characterize the locomotor performance curve. At each water 491 \nvelocity, fish swam for 10 mins (58) to reach a steady state in ṀO2 at low speeds (see Fig. S6). 492 \nAbove 40% Ucrit , ṀO2 can become more variable (59). Hence, in this protocol, we focus on 493 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n17 \nmeasuring the sustained aerobic energy expenditure by calculating the average ṀO2 for each 10-494 \nmin velocity step using Eqn 1. The respirometry system reaches a stable signal-to-noise ratio 495 \nonce the sampling window is longer than 1.67 mins (see Fig. S7), well within the duration of the 496 \nvelocity step to obtain a stable signal-to-noise ratio for calculating ṀO2 (59). At the 5th min of 497 \neach velocity step, both ventral and lateral-view cameras are triggered simultaneously to record 498 \n10-sec footage at 125 frames per second, at 1/1000 shutter speed and 1024 ×1024 pixel 499 \nresolution. Thus, both data streams of ṀO2 and high-speed videos are recorded simultaneously. 500 \nThe Ucrit test is terminated when 12.5% of fish in the school or a solitary individual touches the 501 \nback grid of the swimming section for more than 20 secs (57). The Ucrit test lasted ~140 mins and 502 \nestimates the aerobic portion of energy expenditure over the entire range of swimming 503 \nperformance.  504 \nTo measure the contribution of non-aerobic O2 cost, where most of the cost is related to 505 \nsubstrate-level phosphorylation, and to calculate the total energy expenditure for swimming over 506 \nthe entire speed range, we measured excess post-exercise oxygen consumption (EPOC) after the 507 \nUcrit test for the ensuing 19 hours, recorded by an automatic system. Most previous 508 \nmeasurements of EPOC after Ucrit test have used a duration of  ~5 hours, but our extended 509 \nmeasurement period ensured that longer duration recovery O2 consumption (EPOC) was 510 \nmeasured completely as fish were exercised to Ucrit (see summary table in 16). The intermittent 511 \nflow of water into the respirometer occurred over 30 s to replenish the dissolved O2 level to 512 \n~95% sat. For the following 900 s the flushing pump remained closed, and the respirometer 513 \nbecame a closed system, with the first 240 s to allow O2 saturation inside the respirometer to 514 \nstabilize. The remaining 660 s when the flushing pump was off during the cycle were used to 515 \nmeasure ṀO2 (see Eqn 1). The cycle is automated by computer software (AquaResp v.3) and 516 \nprovided 74 measurements of ṀO2 to compute EPOC. Upon the completion of the three-day 517 \nprotocol, the school or individual fish are returned to the home aquarium for recovery. The fish 518 \ncondition was closely monitored during the first 48 hours after the experiment, during which no 519 \nmortality was observed. 520 \n 521 \nBioenergetic measurement and modeling 522 \nTo estimate the steady-rate whole-animal aerobic metabolic rate, ṀO2 values were 523 \ncalculated from the sequential interval regression algorithm (Eqn. 1) using the dissolved O2 (DO) 524 \npoints continuously sampled (~1 Hz) from the respirometer.  525 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n18 \nṀO! = $\n\"!\"[$,($'()]\n\"+[$,($'()]\n∗ &𝑉# − 𝑉$) ∗ 𝑆%+ (𝑡 ∗ 𝑀$)0      (Eqn. 1) 526 \n 527 \nWhere 𝑑&%\n𝑑'\n0  is the change in O2 saturation with time, Vr is the respirometer volume, Vf is 528 \nthe fish volume (1 g body mass = 1 ml water), So is the water solubility of O2 (calculated by 529 \nAquaResp v.3 software) at the experimental temperature, salinity and atmospheric pressure, t is a 530 \ntime constant of 3600 s h-1, Mf is fish mass, and a is the sampling window duration, i is the next 531 \nPO2 sample after the preceding sampling window.  532 \nTo account for allometric scaling, the ṀO2 values of solitary fish were transformed to match 533 \nthe size of the individual fish in the school using an allometric scaling exponent (b = 0.7546). 534 \nThe calculation of the scaling relationship [Log10(ṀO2) = b•Log10(M) + Log10(a), where M is 535 \nthe body mass & a is a constant] was performed by least squares linear regression analysis (y = 536 \n0.7546•x + 0.2046; R2 = 0.6727, p < 0.0001) on the 180 data points of metabolic rate and body 537 \nmass from a closely related species (the best available dataset to our knowledge) (61). The 538 \nallometrically scaled ṀO2 values were used to derive other energetic metrics (listed below) for 539 \nthe solitary fish. The energetic metrics of fish schools are calculated from the mass-specific ṀO2. 540 \nThe resting oxygen uptake (ṀO2rest), the minimum resting metabolic demands of a group of 541 \nfish or a solitary individual, is calculated from a quantile 20% algorithm (62) using the ṀO2 542 \nestimated between the 10th–18th hour and beyond the 32nd  hour of the trial. These are the periods 543 \nof quiescent state when fish completed the EPOC from handling and swimming test.  544 \nThe excess post-exercise oxygen consumption (EPOC) is an integral area of ṀO2 measured 545 \nduring post-exercise recovery, from the end of Ucrit until reached ṀO2rest plus 10% (60). This 546 \napproach reduces the likelihood of overestimating EPOC due to spontaneous activities (60). To 547 \naccount for the allometric scaling effect, we used the total amount of O2 consumed (mg O2) by 548 \nthe standardized body mass of fish (1.66 g) for fish schools and solitary fish.  549 \nWe model EPOC (i.e. non-aerobic O2 cost) to estimate a total O2 cost over the duration of 550 \nthe swimming performance test. Our conceptual approach was pioneered by Brett (35) in fish 551 \nand is also used in sports science (33). Mathematical modeling was applied to study the effects 552 \nof temperature on the cost of swimming for migratory salmon (57). We improved the 553 \nmathematical modeling by applying the following physiological and physics criteria. The first 554 \ncriterion is that significant accumulation of glycolytic end-product occurred when fish swimming 555 \nabove 50% Ucrit (63) which corresponds to > ~40% ṀO2max (or ~ 50% aerobic scope) (33). This 556 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n19 \nis also when fish start unsteady-state burst-&-glide swimming gait (63). The second criterion is 557 \nthat the integral area for the non-aerobic O2 cost during swimming can only differ by ≤ 0.2% 558 \nwhen compared to EPOC. The non-aerobic O2 cost during swimming is the area bounded by 559 \nmodeled ṀO2 and measured ṀO2 as a function of time when fish swim > 50% Ucrit (see Fig. 2A 560 \n& Table S2). The third criterion is that total energy expenditure is expected to increase 561 \nexponentially with swimming speed (Fig. S7). Specifically, these curves were fitted by power 562 \nseries or polynomial models, the same models that describe the relationship between water 563 \nvelocity and total power and energy cost of transport (Fig. S7). Following these criteria, the non-564 \naerobic O2 cost at each swimming speed is computed by a percentage (%) modifier based on the 565 \naerobic O2 cost (Table S1 & S2). The exponential curve of total O2 cost as swimming speed of 566 \neach fish school or solitary individual was derived by an iterative process until the difference 567 \nbetween non-aerobic O2 cost and EPOC met the 2nd criterion. The sum of non-aerobic O2 cost 568 \nand aerobic cost gives the total O2 cost.  569 \nThe best model fitting following the relationships between water velocity and energetic 570 \ncosts of locomotion suggests that the glycolysis starts at 2–3 BL s-1 for fish swimming in the 571 \nturbulence flow, whereas the same model suggests that the glycolysis starts at 4–5 BL s-1 for fish 572 \nswimming in the controlled flow. We are confident in this model, because the engaging 573 \nglycolysis at the lower swimming speed for the fish swimming in turbulent flow corresponded 574 \nwith their lower Ucrit (controlled flow: 8 BL s-1 vs. turbulent flow: 7 BL s-1). The model of 575 \naerobic and non-aerobic energy costs of locomotion enabled the estimation of total energy 576 \nexpenditure and total cost of transport as detailed below: 577 \nTotal energy expenditure (TEE) is calculated by converting total O2 cost to kJ × kg-1 using 578 \nan oxy-calorific equivalent of 3.25 cal per 1 mg O2 (64). 579 \nTotal cost of transport (COT), in kJ × km-1 × kg-1 is calculated by dividing TEE by speed (in 580 \nkm × h-1) (58). 581 \n 582 \nHydrodynamic flow visualization & analysis 583 \nWe used a horizontal plane of laser sheet (LD pumped all-solid-state 532nm green laser, 584 \n5w, MGL-N-532A, Opto Engine LLC) to visualize and quantify the hydrodynamic conditions of 585 \nlaminar and turbulent flows (i.e. particle image velocimetry, PIV). The horizontal planes of the 586 \nwater fluid field in laminar and turbulent conditions were calculated from consecutive video 587 \nframes (1024 × 1024 pixels) using DaVis v8.3.1 (LaVision Inc., Göttingen, Germany). A vector 588 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n20 \nfield (covering a horizontal plane of 34.3 cm2 with 2193 vectors) is characterized by a sequential 589 \ncross-correlation algorithm applied with an initial interrogation window size of 64 × 64 pixels 590 \nthat ended at 12 × 12 pixels (3 passes, overlap 50%). To optimize the signal-to-noise ratio on the 591 \nsequential cross-correlation algorithm, we used an increment of 10 frames at the lowest speed of 592 \nlaminar and turbulent flow conditions. The rest of the speeds in both flow conditions were 593 \nanalyzed using an increment of 1 frame. Five sets of consecutive video frames (1st, 250th, 500th, 594 \n750th and 990th frame out of 1000 frames) in laminar (n=5) and turbulent flows (n=5) were used 595 \nfor calculating the metrics.  596 \nTo optimize the sampling resolution of consecutive PIV frames, the six lowest testing 597 \nspeeds (106, 131, 156, 181, 256, 356 RPM) of both flow conditions were captured by 1000 598 \nframe rate per sec (shutter speed: 1/1000), whereas the six highest testing speed (456, 556, 656, 599 \n756, 856 RPM) of both flow conditions were captured by 2000 frame rate per sec (shutter speed: 600 \n1/1000) using a high-speed camera (FASTCAM Mini AX50 type 170K-M-16GB, Phontron Inc., 601 \nUnited States, lens: Nikon 50mm F1.2, Japan).  602 \nFrom the fluid field, we used DaVis (v8.3.1) to calculate the following fluid parameters:  603 \nVmax (m s-1): Extract the maximum value of the velocity at the vector that is perpendicular 604 \nto the free-stream flow.  605 \nMaximum vorticity (sec-1): calculated according to the central difference scheme with four 606 \nclosest neighbours at the horizontal plane. This method achieves a high spatial resolution. 607 \nMaximum shear strength (1/S2): maximum value of the shear strength. Shear strength is the 608 \npositive Eigenvalue of the Matrix for two-dimensional vorticity on the horizontal plane. 609 \nSum of shear strength (1/S2): sum of the shear strength. The calculation of shear strength is 610 \nstated above.  611 \nTo compute the fluctuation velocity, turbulence intensity, and eddy size distribution in the 612 \nturbulent flow, a subsection of the full velocity field was extracted. This subsection spans an area 613 \nof 22.4 cm2 and was located approximately 4 cm from the passive grid (Fig. S1) and 0.5 cm from 614 \nthe walls of the tunnel. For this analysis, velocity fields were computed on all 2000 frames. For 615 \nfurther information about the quantification of turbulence and the distribution of eddy sizes, 616 \nreaders can refer to the supplementary material (see computing fluctuation velocity and 617 \nturbulence intensity). 618 \n 619 \nThree-dimensional kinematic data extraction from high-speed videography  620 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n21 \nWe used two synchronized 10-sec high-speed videos (lateral and ventral views, at each 621 \nspeed) for kinematic analyses. We calibrated the field of view of the high-speed cameras using a 622 \ndirect linear transformation for three-dimensional kinematic reconstruction (DLTdv8) (65) by 623 \napplying a stereo calibration to the swimming section of the respirometer (see Fig. S8). We 624 \ndigitized the anatomical landmarks of fish (see Fig. S10) to obtain the X, Y, Z coordinates for 625 \neach marker at the 1st sec, 5th sec and 10th sec for videos recorded at each speed. These 626 \ncoordinates are used to calculate the following kinematic parameters. All the calculations are 627 \nvalidated on the known length and angle of test objects inserted into the tank working section.    628 \nStrouhal number (St) represents the dimensionless flapping frequency and amplitude at a 629 \ngiven movement speed. St = \n$(\n)  Where f, 𝐴\tand U are the tailbeat frequency, amplitude, and 630 \nswimming speed (13). The measurement is conducted on the calibrated high-speed video in 631 \nvideo analysis software (Phontron FASTCAM Viewer 4, Photron USA, Inc.). 632 \nReynolds number (Re) represents the dimensionless fluid inertial to viscous forces at a 633 \ngiven speed. Re = \n*)+\n, , where 𝜌 and 𝜇 are the density and dynamic viscosity of the water, and 634 \n𝑈\tand 𝐿\tare the swimming speed and length of the fish (13). Water density and dynamic viscosity 635 \nare given at 28 °C. 636 \nIn addition to the manual digitization, we also developed a contrast-based segmentation 637 \nalgorithm for automatic tracking of 2D kinematics in the ventral view. The video analysis was 638 \nperformed in MATLAB (R2022b). We processed each frame in the video independently. We 639 \nfirst converted the frame into grayscale and then used a brightness threshold to obtain masks of 640 \nthe fish (Fig S9A). We removed masks with an area larger than that expected for a single fish, 641 \nexcluding masks with multiple overlapping fish. For every streamwise location on the mask (x-642 \nlocation), we calculated the midpoint across the span to obtain the midline of the animal at each 643 \ninstant. The midlines were pieced together across frames according to their locations. We 644 \ncentered and rotated a series of midlines to account for the rigid-body component of the fish 645 \nbody. At this stage of the image analysis, we obtained midline envelopes of the fish (Fig. S9B). 646 \nWe extracted a time series of head and nose spanwise oscillation, identified peaks and troughs of 647 \nthe signal and calculated the amplitude and frequency of the fish (Fig. S9C, D). We excluded 648 \ntime series that are shorter than a tail beat cycle and those associated with unsteady swimming, 649 \neither with a high relative velocity with flow or fast rotation.  650 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n22 \nTo further characterize the head oscillation of fish in different flow environments, we 651 \nprocessed trajectories that are several dozen cycles long at 6 BL s-1, extracted through manual 652 \ndigitization  (DLTdv8a) (8.2.10) (65). To distinguish the nose oscillation from the background 653 \nmovement of the fish during the period, we performed Fast Fourier Transform (FFT) in 654 \nMATLAB (R2022b). The FFT analyses enabled us to separate the original time series of the 655 \nnose trajectories into background motion (low-frequency component) and oscillation due to fish 656 \nswimming (high-frequency component). The latter is plotted in Fig 7B. 657 \n 658 \nStatistical analyses 659 \nMeasurement points are presented as mean ± s.e.m. For the metrics that failed normality 660 \ntests, logarithm transformations were applied to meet the assumptions of normality of residuals, 661 \nhomoscedasticity of the residuals, and no trend in the explanatory variables. We conducted 662 \nsupervised statistical tests to specifically evaluate our hypotheses about the effects of turbulence 663 \non the biomechanics and bioenergetics of fish swimming, either in school or alone. The 664 \nstatistical comparisons for the different responses of fish schools (or solitary fish) between 665 \nswimming in laminar flows and in turbulent flow used a mixed effects model (laminar flow vs. 666 \nturbulent flow & swimming speed) with Holm–Šídák post-hoc tests. The statistical comparisons 667 \nfor the difference between fish schools and solitary fish swimming in the turbulence used a 668 \ngeneral linear model (solitary fish vs. fish schools & swimming speed) with Holm–Šídák post-669 \nhoc tests. The statistical comparison for the characteristics of fluid dynamics between laminar 670 \nand turbulent flow conditions used a general linear model that used speed as a covariance. The 671 \nstatistical comparison of EPOC between fish schools and solitary fish after performing the Ucrit 672 \ntest in turbulent conditions used an unpaired t-test. The statistical analyses were conducted in 673 \nSPSS v.28 (SPSS Inc. Chicago, IL, USA). The best-fitting regression analyses were conducted 674 \nusing Prism v.9.4.1 (GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA). 95% C.I. values were presented 675 \nfor all regression models as shaded areas around the regression or data points. Statistical 676 \nsignificance is denoted by *, **, ***, **** for p-values of ≤ 0.05, ≤ 0.01, ≤ 0.001, ≤ 0.0001 677 \nrespectively.  678 \n 679 \nAcknowledgments: Many thanks to members of Lauder Laboratory for numerous discussions 680 \nabout fish schooling behaviour, for comments on the manuscript, to Dr. Robin Thandickal for 681 \nassistance with the convex hull calculations, and to Cory Hahn for fish care. 682 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n23 \nFunding: Funding provided by the National Science Foundation grant 1830881 (GVL), the 683 \nOffice of Naval Research grants N00014-21-1-2661 (GVL), N00014-16-1-2515 (GVL), 00014-684 \n22-1-2616 (GVL), and a Postdoctoral Fellowship of Natural Sciences and Engineering Research 685 \nCouncil of Canada PDF - 557785 – 2021 (YZ). 686 \nAuthor contributions:  687 \n      Conceptualization: YZ, GL. RN 688 \n            Methodology: YZ, GL, HK, MC, HK, RN 689 \n Investigation: YZ, HK, MC 690 \n Visualization: YZ, GL, MC, HK, RN 691 \n Funding acquisition: GL, YZ, RN 692 \n Project administration: GL, RN 693 \n Supervision: GL, RN 694 \n Writing – original draft: YZ 695 \nWriting – review & editing: YZ, GL, HK, MC, RN 696 \n Competing interests: Authors declare that they have no competing interests. 697 \n Data and materials availability: All data are available in the main text or the supplementary       698 \n materials 699 \n 700 \nReferences 701 \n1. Trinci G, Harvey GL, Henshaw AJ, Bertoldi W, Hölker F. Life in turbulent flows: interactions between 702 \nhydrodynamics and aquatic organisms in rivers. WIREs Water. 2017;4(3):e1213.  703 \n2. Cote AJ, Webb PW. Living in a turbulent world—A new conceptual framework for the interactions of fish and 704 \neddies. Integrative and Comparative Biology. 2015;55(4):662–72.  705 \n3. Liao JC. A review of fish swimming mechanics and behaviour in altered flows. Philosophical Transactions of 706 \nthe Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 2007;362(1487):1973–93.  707 \n4. Liao JC, Cotel A. Effects of Turbulence on Fish Swimming in Aquaculture. In: Palstra AP, Planas JV, editors. 708 \nSwimming physiology of fish: Towards using exercise to farm a fit fish in sustainable aquaculture. Berlin, 709 \nHeidelberg: Springer; 2013. p. 109–27. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-31049-2_5 710 \n5. Higham TE, Stewart WJ, Wainwright PC. Turbulence, temperature, and turbidity: The ecomechanics of 711 \npredator–prey interactions in fishes. Integrative and Comparative Biology. 2015;55(1):6–20.  712 \n6. Vassilicos JC, Hunt JCR. Turbulence structure and vortex dynamics. Cambridge University Press; 2000. 326 p.  713 \n7. Tennekes H, Lumley JL. A first course in turbulence. MIT Press; 1972. 320 p.  714 \n8. Smits AJ, Marusic I. Wall-bounded turbulence. Physics Today. 2013;66(9):25–30.  715 \n9. Carling PA, Cao Z, Holland MJ, Ervine DA, Babaeyan-Koopaei K. Turbulent flow across a natural compound 716 \nchannel. Water Resources Research. 2002;38(12):6-1-6–11.  717 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n24 \n10. Roy AG, Biron PM, Buffin-Bélanger T, Levasseur M. Combined visual and quantitative techniques in the study 718 \nof natural turbulent flows. Water Resources Research. 1999;35(3):871–7.  719 \n11. Jackson JBC, Kirby MX, Berger WH, Bjorndal KA, Botsford LW, Bourque BJ, et al. Historical overfishing and 720 \nthe recent collapse of coastal ecosystems. Science. 2001;293(5530):629–37.  721 \n12. Lotze HK, Lenihan HS, Bourque BJ, Bradbury RH, Cooke RG, Kay MC, et al. Depletion, degradation, and 722 \nrecovery potential of estuaries and coastal seas. Science. 2006;312(5781):1806–9.  723 \n13. Vogel S. Life in Moving Fluids: The Physical biology of flow - Revised and expanded second edition. 724 \nPrinceton University Press; 1981. 484 p.  725 \n14. Tritico HM, Cotel AJ. The effects of turbulent eddies on the stability and critical swimming speed of creek 726 \nchub (Semotilus atromaculatus). Journal of Experimental Biology. 2010;213(13):2284–93.  727 \n15. Cotel AJ, Webb PW, Tritico H. Do Brown trout choose locations with reduced turbulence? Transactions of the 728 \nAmerican Fisheries Society. 2006;135(3):610–9.  729 \n16. Enders EC, Boisclair D, Roy AG. The effect of turbulence on the cost of swimming for juvenile Atlantic 730 \nsalmon (Salmo salar). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. 2003;60(9):1149–60.  731 \n17. Dabiri JO. Do Swimming Animals Mix the Ocean? Limnology and Oceanography Bulletin.; Available from: 732 \nhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/lob.10614 733 \n18. Lorkea A, Probsta WN. In situ measurements of turbulence in fish shoals. Limnology and Oceanography. 734 \n2010;55(1):354–64.  735 \n19. Tanaka M, Nagai T, Okada T, Yamazaki H. Measurement of sardine-generated turbulence in a large tank. 736 \nMarine Ecology Progress Series. 2017 May 17;571:207–20.  737 \n20. Lupandin AI. Effect of flow turbulence on swimming speed of fish. Biology Bulletin of the Russian Academy 738 \nof Sciences. 2005;32(5):461–6.  739 \n21. Ogilvy CS, Dubois AB. The Hydrodynamic Drag of Swimming bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix) in different 740 \nintensities of turbulence: Variation with changes of buoyancy. Journal of Experimental Biology. 741 \n1981;92(1):67–85.  742 \n22. Pavlov D, Lupandin A, Skorobogatov M. The effects of flow turbulence on the behavior and distribution of 743 \nfish. Journal of Ichthyology. 2000;20. Available from: 744 \nhttps://scholarworks.umass.edu/fishpassage_journal_articles/749 745 \n23. Webb PW, Cotel AJ. Assessing possible effects of fish-culture systems on fish swimming: the role of stability 746 \nin turbulent flows. Fish Physiol Biochem. 2011;37(2):297–305.  747 \n24. Pavlov DS, Skorobogatov MA. Effect of the flow turbulence on the movement pattern of the caudal fin in fish. 748 \nDoklady Biological Science. 2009;428(1):464–6.  749 \n25. Silva AT, Santos JM, Ferreira MT, Pinheiro AN, Katopodis C. Effects of water velocity and turbulence on the 750 \nbehaviour of Iberian barbel (Luciobarbus bocagei, Steindachner 1864) in an experimental pool-type fishway. 751 \nRiver Research and Applications. 2011;27(3):360–73.  752 \n26. Tan J, Gao Z, Dai H, Yang Z, Shi X. Effects of turbulence and velocity on the movement behaviour of bighead 753 \ncarp (Hypophthalmichthys nobilis) in an experimental vertical slot fishway. Ecological Engineering. 754 \n2019;127:363–74.  755 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n25 \n27. Tian FB, Luo H, Zhu L, Liao JC, Lu XY. An efficient immersed boundary-lattice Boltzmann method for the 756 \nhydrodynamic interaction of elastic filaments. Journal of Computational Physics. 201;230(19):7266–83.  757 \n28. Daghooghi M, Borazjani I. The hydrodynamic advantages of synchronized swimming in a rectangular pattern. 758 \nBioinspir Biomim. 2015;10(5):056018.  759 \n29. Lauder GV. Fish Locomotion: Recent Advances and New Directions. Annual Review of Marine Science. 760 \n2015;7(1):521–45.  761 \n30. Lauder GV, Madden PGA. Fish locomotion: kinematics and hydrodynamics of flexible foil-like fins. Exp 762 \nFluids. 2007;43(5):641–53.  763 \n31. Nauen JC, Lauder GV. Hydrodynamics of caudal fin locomotion by chub mackerel, Scomber japonicus 764 \n(Scombridae). Journal of Experimental Biology. 2002;205(12):1709–24.  765 \n32. Quinn DB, Moored KW, Dewey PA, Smits AJ. Unsteady propulsion near a solid boundary. Journal of Fluid 766 \nMechanics. 2014;742:152–70.  767 \n33. Laforgia J, Withers RT, Gore CJ. Effects of exercise intensity and duration on the excess post-exercise oxygen 768 \nconsumption. Journal of Sports Sciences. 2006;24(12):1247–64.  769 \n34. Zhang Y, Lauder GV. Energetics of collective movement in vertebrates. Journal of Experimental Biology. 2023 770 \n;226(20):jeb245617.  771 \n35. Brett JR. The respiratory metabolism and swimming performance of young sockeye salmon. Journal of 772 \nFisheries Research Board of Canada. 1964;21(5):1183–226.  773 \n36. Zhang Y, Claireaux G, Takle H, Jørgensen SM, Farrell AP. A three-phase excess post-exercise oxygen 774 \nconsumption in Atlantic salmon Salmo salar and its response to exercise training. Journal of Fish Biology. 775 \n2018;92(5):1385–403.  776 \n37. Wood CM. Acid-base and ion balance, metabolism, and their Interactions, after exhaustive exercise in Fish. 777 \nJournal of Experimental Biology. 1991;160(1):285–308.  778 \n38. Hachim M, Rouyer T, Dutto G, Kerzerho V, Bernard S, Bourjea J, et al. Oxygen uptake, heart rate and 779 \nactivities of locomotor muscles during a critical swimming speed protocol in the gilthead sea bream Sparus 780 \naurata. Journal of Fish Biology. 2021;98(3):886–90.  781 \n39. Jayne BC, Lauder GV. New data on axial locomotion in fishes: How speed affects diversity of kinematics and 782 \nmotor patterns. American Zoologist. 1996;36(6):642–55.  783 \n40. Cooke SJ, Brownscombe JW, Raby GD, Broell F, Hinch SG, Clark TD, et al. Remote bioenergetics 784 \nmeasurements in wild fish: Opportunities and challenges. Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part A: 785 \nMolecular & Integrative Physiology. 2016;202:23–37.  786 \n41. Jørgensen C, Enberg K, Mangel M. Modelling and interpreting fish bioenergetics: a role for behaviour, life-787 \nhistory traits and survival trade-offs. Journal of Fish Biology. 2016;88(1):389–402.  788 \n42. Brownscombe JW, Lawrence MJ, Deslauriers D, Filgueira R, Boyd RJ, Cooke SJ. Chapter 4 - Applied fish 789 \nbioenergetics. In: Cooke SJ, Fangue NA, Farrell AP, Brauner CJ, Eliason EJ, editors. Fish Physiology. 790 \nAcademic Press; 2022. p. 141–88. (Conservation Physiology for the Anthropocene – A Systems Approach; vol. 791 \n39). Available from: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1546509822000048 792 \n43. Triantafyllou MS, Triantafyllou GS, Yue DKP. Hydrodynamics of fishlike swimming. Annual Review of Fluid 793 \nMechanics. 2000;32(1):33–53.  794 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n26 \n44. Triantafyllou MS, Techet AH, Hover FS. Review of experimental work in biomimetic foils. IEEE Journal of 795 \nOceanic Engineering. 2004;29(3):585–94.  796 \n45. Gazzola M, Argentina M, Mahadevan L. Scaling macroscopic aquatic locomotion. Nature Phys. 797 \n2014;10(10):758–61.  798 \n46. Thandiackal R, Lauder G. In-line swimming dynamics revealed by fish interacting with a robotic mechanism. 799 \nLentink D, Rutz C, Porfiri M, editors. eLife. 2023;12:e81392.  800 \n47. Ko H, Lauder G, Nagpal R. The role of hydrodynamics in collective motions of fish schools and bioinspired 801 \nunderwater robots. Journal of The Royal Society Interface. 2023;20(207):20230357.  802 \n48. Kurt M, Moored KW. Flow interactions of two- and three-dimensional networked bio-inspired control elements 803 \nin an in-line arrangement. Bioinspir Biomim. 2018;13(4):045002.  804 \n49. Taguchi M, Liao JC. Rainbow trout consume less oxygen in turbulence: the energetics of swimming behaviors 805 \nat different speeds. Journal of Experimental Biology. 2011;214(9):1428–36.  806 \n50. Liao JC, Beal DN, Lauder GV, Triantafyllou MS. Fish exploiting vortices decrease muscle activity. Science. 807 \n2003;302(5650):1566–9.  808 \n51. Wang T, Hung CCY, Randall DJ. The comparative physiology of food deprivatioN: From Feast to Famine. 809 \nAnnual Review of Physiology. 2006;68(1):223–51.  810 \n52. Castro-Santos T, Goerig E, He P, Lauder GV. Chapter 3 - Applied aspects of locomotion and biomechanics. In: 811 \nCooke SJ, Fangue NA, Farrell AP, Brauner CJ, Eliason EJ, editors. Fish Physiology. Academic Press; 2022. p. 812 \n91–140. (Conservation Physiology for the Anthropocene – A Systems Approach; vol. 39). Available from: 813 \nhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1546509822000036 814 \n53. Nepf HM. Flow and transport in regions with aquatic vegetation. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics. 815 \n2012;44(1):123–42.  816 \n54. Schalko I, Wohl E, Nepf HM. Flow and wake characteristics associated with large wood to inform river 817 \nrestoration. Scientific Report. 2021 Apr 21;11(1):8644.  818 \n55. Smith DL, Goodwin RA, Nestler JM. Relating turbulence and fish habitat: A new approach for management 819 \nand research. Reviews in Fisheries Science & Aquaculture. 2014;22(2):123–30.  820 \n56. Zhang Y, Lauder G. Energy conservation by group dynamics in schooling fish. bioRxiv; 2023. p. 821 \n2022.11.09.515731. Available from: https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.11.09.515731v2 822 \n57. Lee CG, Farrell AP, Lotto A, Hinch SG, Healey MC. Excess post-exercise oxygen consumption in adult 823 \nsockeye (Oncorhynchus nerka) and coho (O. kisutch) salmon following critical speed swimming. Journal of 824 \nExperimental Biology. 2003;206(18):3253–60.  825 \n58. Di Santo V, Kenaley CP, Lauder GV. High postural costs and anaerobic metabolism during swimming support 826 \nthe hypothesis of a U-shaped metabolism–speed curve in fishes. Proceedings of the National Academy of 827 \nSciences. 2017;114(49):13048–53.  828 \n59. Zhang Y, Gilbert MJH, Farrell AP. Finding the peak of dynamic oxygen uptake during fatiguing exercise in 829 \nfish. Journal of Experimental Biology. 2019;222(12). Available from: https://doi.org/10.1242/jeb.196568 830 \n60. Zhang Y, Claireaux G, Takle H, Jørgensen SM, Farrell AP. A three-phase excess post-exercise oxygen 831 \nconsumption in Atlantic salmon Salmo salar and its response to exercise training. Journal of Fish Biology. 832 \n2018;92(5):1385–403.  833 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n   \n \n27 \n61. Wootton HF, Morrongiello JR, Schmitt T, Audzijonyte A. Smaller adult fish size in warmer water is not 834 \nexplained by elevated metabolism. Ecology Letters. 2022;25(5):1177–88.  835 \n62. Chabot D, Steffensen JF, Farrell AP. The determination of standard metabolic rate in fishes. Journal of Fish 836 \nBiology. 2016;88(1):81–121.  837 \n63. Peake SJ, Farrell AP. Postexercise physiology and repeat performance behaviour of free‐swimming smallmouth 838 \nbass in an experimental raceway. Physiological and Biochemical Zoology. 2005;78(5):801–7.  839 \n64. Brafield AE, Solomon DJ. Oxy-calorific coefficients for animals respiring nitrogenous substrates. Comparative 840 \nBiochemistry and Physiology Part A: Physiology. 1972;43(4):837–41.  841 \n65. Hedrick TL. Software techniques for two- and three-dimensional kinematic measurements of biological and 842 \nbiomimetic systems. Bioinspir Biomim. 2008;3(3):034001.  843 \n 844 \n 845 \nSupplementary Materials 846 \nFigs. S1 to S9 847 \nSupplementary Text 848 \nTables S1 to S2 849 \n.CC-BY 4.0 International licenseavailable under a \n(which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made \nThe copyright holder for this preprintthis version posted January 22, 2024. ; https://doi.org/10.1101/2024.01.18.576168doi: bioRxiv preprint \n\n    \n28 \n 850  851 FIGURES CAPTIONS 852  853 \n 854  855 Fig. 1. Illustration of the environmental turbulence sheltering hypothesis.  Schematic 856 diagram of a school of giant danio (Devario aequipinnatus) swimming in oncoming turbulence 857 where the largest eddies have an integral length scale (𝐿) on the same order of magnitude as the 858 body depth (D) of the fish. Fish within the school could benefit from a region of reduced 859 turbulence created within the school as a result of nearby neighbours and undulatory body 860 motion modifying flow within the school compared to free stream oncoming flow. As a result, 861 we propose a “turbulence sheltering” hypothesis that fish schools can protect individuals within 862 the group from free-stream turbulence. As a result, we predict fish swimming in turbulence could 863 reduce their locomotor costs by schooling in contrast to swimming alone.864 \n!\n!\n/\n#\n~\n1\n\"Region of modulated turbulence\nSurrounding turbulent environment \n\n    \n29 \n 865 Fig. 2. Characterization of hydrodynamic features in controlled and turbulent flows across 866 a range of speeds used for danio schooling energetic and kinematic measurements. 867 Representative flow patterns of (A) turbulent and (B) control conditions in the swim-tunnel 868 respirometer as quantified by particle image velocimetry. Velocity vectors are yellow arrows, 869 and the vorticity field is shown by blue (-40 sec-1) to red (40 sec-1) gradient heat maps in the 870 background. The hydrodynamic features of turbulent (orange colour) and controlled (green 871 colour) flows are characterized by (C) maximum vertical velocity, (D) maximum vorticity, (E) 872 maximum and (F) the sum of shear strength as a function of absolute speed (meter sec-1). More 873 detailed flow characteristics are illustrated in the Supplemental materials for characteristics of 874 the turbulent flow generated in the respirometer (Fig. S2. The statistics in each panel denote the 875 \n0.0 0.2 0.4 0.60.00\n0.05\n0.10\n0.15\n0.20\nU (m s-1)\nVmax (m s-1)\nLaminar\nTurbulence\nF = 401.9\np < 0.001\n0.0 0.2 0.4 0.60\n1000\n2000\n3000\n4000\nU (m s-1)\nMax shear strength (1/S2) Laminar\nTurbulence\nF = 153.7\np < 0.001\n0.0 0.2 0.4 0.60\n50\n100\n150\nU (m s-1)\nVorticitymax (sec -1)\nTurbulence\nLaminar\nF = 167.8\np < 0.001\n0.0 0.2 0.4 0.60\n2×107\n4×107\n6×107\n8×107\n1×108\nU (m s-1)\nSum shear strength (1/S2) Laminar\nTurbulence\nF = 189.4\np < 0.001\nC D\nE F\nA B\n0.5 m s-1\n5 mm\n40\n-400---Vorticity (sec-1)\n0.5 m s-1\n5 mm\n40\n-400---Vorticity (sec-1)\n\n    \n30 \nmain effect of the flow condition. Shading indicates the 95% confidence interval. Statistical 876 details are available in the statistical analyses section. The controlled fluid condition is a 877 laminarized flow environment.  878 \n\n    \n31 \n 879 Fig. 3. Analysis of turbulent flow in the respirometer used for testing schooling energetics. 880 Probability density function (p.d.f) of velocity components (A) parallel (𝑢) and (B) 881 perpendicular (𝑣)\tto the swimming direction for different swimming speeds with the passive 882 turbulence grid. As speed increases, the width of the distribution increases, signifying increasing 883 turbulence. (C) The turbulence intensity (𝐼) and fluctuation velocity (𝑢-.) as a function of 884 swimming speed. Fluctuation velocity increases with increasing speed. However, the increase in 885 the fluctuation velocity is proportional to the increase in the speed  resulting in a near constant 886 turbulence intensity. (D) Distribution of eddy sizes present for a given swimming speed, from 887 largest (integral length scale) to smallest (Kolmogorov length scale). The eddy size distribution 888 was determined by approximating the energy dissipation rate via computation of the two-889 dimensional structure functions (See Supplemental Material for further information). The largest 890 eddies were roughly the same size as the fish’s body depth, or 30% of their body length. The 891 control fluid test condition is a laminarized flow environment.892 \n0.00.20.40.6 u (m s-1)10-4\n10-2\n100\n102p.d.f\n1BL s-12BL s-1\n-0.20.00.2 v (m s-1)10-4\n10-2\n100\n102p.d.f\n3BL s-14BL s-15BL s-16BL s-17BL s-18BL s-1\n02468Speed (BL s-1)10-3\n10-2\n10-1\n100 uo (m s-1),  I\n uo I02468Speed (BL s-1)10-210-1100101102Length Scale (mm)\nA B\nC Integral Length Scale (L)\nScale Separation\nKolmogorov Length Scale ()\nD\n\n    \n32 \n893 Fig. 4. Measurements of aerobic and non-aerobic locomotor costs for fish schools and 894 solitary fish in control and turbulent flow conditions. (A) Comparison of concave upward 895 metabolic rate (ṀO2)-speed curve over 0.3–8 body length s-1 (BL s-1) range for fish schools and 896 solitary fish swimming in control and turbulent flow conditions. (B) recovery time of excess 897 post-exercise O2 consumption (EPOC) and (C) EPOC of fish schools and solitary fish after 898 swimming in control and turbulent conditions. Concave upward total ṀO2-speed curve of (D) 899 fish schools and (E) solitary fish when swimming in control and turbulent conditions. The total 900 ṀO2-speed curve (dashed line) is calculated from a model that integrates the measurements 901 (solid line) of aerobic and non-aerobic locomotion costs (see Supplemental Material). (F) Total 902 \n0 2 4 6 8\n0\n300\n600\n900\n1200\n1500\nSpeed (BL s-1)\nR2 = 0.9791,\nAIC = 101.8R2 = 0.9936,  \nSchool laminar\nAIC = 112.4\nIndividual laminar\nṀO2 (mg O2 kg-1 h-1)\nSchool turbulence\nIndividual turbulence\nAIC = 96.09R2 = 0.9933,  \nAIC = 114.8R2 = 0.9876,  \n✱✱\n✱✱✱✱\n✱✱✱\n32%\n▴\n012345678\n0\n500\n1000\n1500\n2000\n2500\n3000\nSpeed (BL s-1)\nṀO2 (mg O2 kg-1 h-1)\nR2 = 0.9975,\nAIC = 98.56R2 = 0.9949,  \nLaminar: school measureAIC = 115.9\nLaminar: school model\n+177%✱✱✱✱\n✱✱✱✱\n+126%\nTurbulence: school measure\nTurbulence: school modelR2 = 0.9983,\nR2 = 0.9933,\nAIC = 109.8\nAIC = 96.09\n▴\n▴\n▴\n+75%✱✱✱✱\n0123456780\n50\n100\n150\n200\n250\n300\nSpeed (BL s-1)\nTotal energy expenditure (kJ kg-1)\nR2 = 0.956,  AIC = 188.1\nAIC = 276.5R2 = 0.9218,  ✱✱✱✱\n✱✱✱✱✱✱\n-79%\n-79%-62%\nSchool laminar\nIndividual laminar\n✱✱✱✱-63%\nSchool Turbulence\nIndividual TurbulenceR2 = 0.8415,AIC = 297.7\nR2 = 0.9421,AIC = 187.3\n✱-65%\n✱✱✱✱✱✱✱✱\n✱✱✱✱\n✱\n✱✱✱✱\n✱✱✱✱\n✱✱▴ ▴\n▴\n▴\nSchool laminarSchool turbulenceIndividual laminarIndividual turbulence\n0\n2\n4\n6\n8EPOC (mg O2 )\n✱✱✱\n✱✱✱✱\n2.8 fold8.0 fold\n012345678\n0\n2000\n4000\n6000\n8000\n10000\n12000\n14000\nSpeed (BL s-1)\nṀO2 (mg O2 kg-1 h-1)\nAIC = 130.4R2 = 0.9920,  \nAIC = 106.8R2 = 0.9866,  \n+799%\n+800%\n+363%\n✱✱✱✱\n✱✱✱✱\n✱✱✱✱\n✱✱\n+251%\nTurbulenace: individual measure\nTurbulence: individual model\n+751%✱✱✱✱\nLaminar: individual model\nlaminar: individual measure\nR2 = 0.9876,AIC = 114.8\nR2 = 0.99,AIC = 180.3\n▴\n▴\n▴\n▴\n▴\n✱\n+528%\n0123456780\n6\n12\n18\n24\n30\nSpeed (BL s-1)\nTotal cost of transport (kJ km-1 kg-1)\nR2 = 0.9615,\nAIC = -45.55R2 = 0.9974,  \nAIC = -10.87\nSchool Turbulence\nIndividual Turbulence\nIndividual laminar\nSchool laminar\nR2 = 0.9987,AIC = -37\nR2 = 0.9454,AIC = 26.99\n✱✱✱✱\n✱✱✱✱✱✱\n-79%\n-79%-68%\n✱✱✱✱-76%\n✱✱✱✱✱✱✱✱\n✱✱✱✱\n✱✱\n✱-65%\n✱\n✱✱✱✱✱✱▴ ▴ ▴ ▴ ▴\nA C\nD E\nF G\nSchool laminarSchool turbulenceIndividual laminarIndividual turbulence\n0\n5\n10\n15\n20\n25EPOC duration (h)\n✱\n1.8 fold\nB\n\n    \n33 \nenergy expenditure (TEE) and (G) concave upward total cost of the transport (TCOT)-speed 903 curves for fish schools and solitary fish when swimming in control and turbulent conditions. 904 Total Energy Expenditure (TEE) and the Total Cost of transport (TCOT) are calculated using the 905 sum of aerobic and non-aerobic costs. Green colour = fish schools in control conditions (n=5); 906 blue colour = solitary fish in control conditions (n=5); orange colour = fish schools in turbulence 907 (n=4); purple colour = solitary fish in turbulence (n=3). Statistical significance is denoted by 908 asterisk(s). Shading indicates the 95% confidence interval. Statistical details are available in the 909 statistical analyses section. The control fluid condition is a laminarized flow environment. 910  911   912 \n\n    \n34 \n913 Fig. 5. Characterization of fish school three-dimensional volume in turbulent and control 914 flow conditions. Representative three-dimensional (3-D) convex hull volume of fish schools in 915 (A) control and (B) turbulent flow conditions. (C) 3-D convex hull volume as a function of speed 916 for fish schools swimming in control (n=9 snapshots per speed increment) and turbulent (n=12 917 snapshots per speed increment) flow conditions. Statistical significance is denoted by asterisk(s). 918 Shading indicates the 95% confidence interval. Statistical details are available in the statistical 919 analyses section. The control fluid condition is a laminarized flow environment.920 \n0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8\n0\n50\n100\n150\n200\nSpeed (BL s-1)\nConvex hull volume (cm3)\nSchool laminar\nSchool control\n✱\n✱✱\n✱✱ ✱ ✱ ✱\n✱\nAIC = 1085R2 = 0.4719,  \nR2 =0.1946,p = 0.1143\n-41%\n-61%\n-53%\n-68%\n-53% -50%\nLaminar\nA B\nC\nTurbulence\nDistance (mm) Distance (mm)\nDistance (mm)\nDistance (mm)\nDistance (mm) Distance (mm)\n\n    \n35 \n921 Fig. 6. Kinematic data on individual fish within the school during locomotion in control 922 and turbulent flow conditions. Tail beat frequency (ftail) of (A) solitary fish and (B) fish schools 923 across 0.3–8 body length s-1 (BL s-1) in control and turbulent flow conditions. Tail beat 924 amplitude (Amptail) of (C) solitary fish and (D) fish schools across 0.3–8 body length s-1 (BL s-1) 925 in control and turbulent flow conditions. An estimate of swimming effort, Ftail • Amptail, of (E) 926 solitary fish and (F) fish schools across 0.3–8 body length s-1 (BL s-1) in control and turbulent 927 flow conditions. Green colour = fish schools in control conditions (n=295–379 sequences); blue 928 colour = solitary fish in control conditions (n=351–416 sequences); orange colour = fish schools 929 in turbulence (n=104–146 sequences); purple colour = solitary fish in turbulence (n=220–258 930 sequences). Statistical significance is denoted by asterisk(s). Shading indicates the 95% 931 confidence interval. Statistical details are available in the statistical analyses section. The control 932 fluid condition is a laminarized flow environment.  933 \n0123456780.00\n0.25\n0.50\n0.75\n1.00\n1.25\n1.50\n1.75\n2.00\n2.25\nSpeed (BL s-1)\nTail beat frequency • Amplitude (BL•sec-1)\nSchool control\nSchool turbulence\nR2 = 0.9846,p < 0.0001\nR2 = 0.9535,p < 0.0001y = 0.215x + 0.468\ny = 0.199x + 0.487\n0123456780.00\n0.25\n0.50\n0.75\n1.00\n1.25\n1.50\n1.75\n2.00\n2.25\nSpeed (BL s-1)\nTail beat frequency •  Amplitude (BL•sec-1)\nIndividual control\nIndividual turbulence\n✱✱✱\n✱✱\n✱✱\n✱\np < 0.0001R2 = 0.9726,\np < 0.0001R2 = 0.9535,\ny = 0.157x + 0.407\ny = 0.202x + 0.314\n+13%\n+15%\n+22%\n0123456780.12\n0.14\n0.16\n0.18\n0.20\n0.22\n0.24\nSpeed (BL s-1)\nTail amplitude (BL)\nIndividual controlIndividual turbulence\n✱✱✱✱✱✱ ✱✱✱\n✱✱✱\n✱✱\n✱✱\n20%\n26%\n▲\n▲\n0123456780.12\n0.14\n0.16\n0.18\n0.20\n0.22\nSpeed (BL s-1)\nTail amplitude (BL)\nSchool controlSchool turbulence✱\n0123456780\n2\n4\n6\n8\n10\n12\n14\nSpeed (BL s-1)\nTail beat frequency (Hz)\nSchool control\nSchool turbulenceR2 = 0.983,p < 0.0001\nR2 = 0.989,p < 0.0001\n✱\n0123456780\n2\n4\n6\n8\n10\n12\nSpeed (BL s-1)\nTail beat frequency (Hz)\nIndividual control\nIndividual turbulencep < 0.0001\np < 0.0001\nR2 = 0.965,\nR2 = 0.994,\n✱✱✱\n✱✱✱\n✱✱✱\n✱\nA\nC\nB\nD\nE F\n\n    \n36 934 \n103\n104\n105\n10-1\n100\nRe\nSt\nIndividual laminar\nSchool laminar\nIndividual turbulence\nSchool turbulence\nLog(y) = 0.0321 – 0.0495 • Log(x), R 2 \n= 0.84, p < 0.0001\nA\nB Individual laminar\nIndividual turbulence\nSchool turbulence\nHead oscillation ( amplitude in body length)\nTime (s)\n-0.05\n0\n0.05\n-0.05\n0\n0.05\n0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5-0.05\n0\n0.05\n\n    \n37 \nFig. 7. Responses of schooling fish to the fluid dynamic environment within fish schools 935 under control and turbulent conditions. (A) Relationship between two key dimensionless 936 parameters (Strouhal number and Reynolds number) for fish swimming in schools and alone 937 under both control and turbulent conditions. Locomotion follows a generally linear relationship 938 (R2=0.84, p<0.0001). The horizontal dashed line provides the hypothesized relationship of St and 939 Re in the turbulent flow following (45). The St number at the lowest speed, when fish exhibited 940 unsteady turning behaviour, is excluded from the analysis to prevent bias in the scaling 941 relationship of directional oscillatory propulsion. (B) Plots of fish head lateral oscillation through 942 time (blue: individual laminar, purple: individual turbulence, orange: school turbulence) in water 943 velocity of 6 body length sec-1. Shading indicates the 95% confidence interval. Statistical details 944 are available in the statistical analyses section. The control fluid condition is a laminarized flow 945 environment. 946  947  948","source_license":"CC-BY-4.0","license_restricted":false}