Literature DB >> 25549809

Comparing the ecological impacts of native and invasive crayfish: could native species' translocation do more harm than good?

J James1, F M Slater, I P Vaughan, K A Young, J Cable.   

Abstract

Biological invasions are a principal threat to global biodiversity. Omnivores, such as crayfish, are among the most important groups of invaders. Their introduction often results in biodiversity loss, particularly of their native counterparts. Managed relocations of native crayfish from areas under threat from invasive crayfish into isolated 'ark sites' are sometimes suggested as a conservation strategy for native crayfish; however, such relocations may have unintended detrimental consequences for the recipient ecosystem. Despite this, there have been few attempts to quantify the relative impacts of native and invasive crayfish on aquatic ecosystems. To address this deficiency we conducted a meta-analysis on the effects of native and invasive crayfish on nine ecosystem components: decomposition rate, primary productivity, plant biomass, invertebrate density, biomass and diversity, fish biomass and refuge use, and amphibian larval survival. Native and invasive crayfish significantly reduced invertebrate density and biomass, fish biomass and amphibian survival rate and significantly increased decomposition rates. Invasive crayfish also significantly reduced plant biomass and invertebrate diversity and increased primary productivity. These results show that native and invasive crayfish have wide-ranging impacts on aquatic ecosystems that may be exacerbated for invasive species. Subsequent analysis showed that the impacts of invasive crayfish were significantly greater, in comparison to native crayfish, for decomposition and primary productivity but not invertebrate density, biomass and diversity. Overall, our findings reconfirm the ecosystem altering abilities of both native and invasive crayfish, enforcing the need to carefully regulate managed relocations of native species as well as to develop control programs for invasives.

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25549809     DOI: 10.1007/s00442-014-3195-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Oecologia        ISSN: 0029-8549            Impact factor:   3.225


  13 in total

1.  Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders.

Authors:  C S. Kolar; D M. Lodge
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2001-04-01       Impact factor: 17.712

2.  Introduced species and their missing parasites.

Authors:  Mark E Torchin; Kevin D Lafferty; Andrew P Dobson; Valerie J McKenzie; Armand M Kuris
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2003-02-06       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Challenges and opportunities in implementing managed relocation for conservation of freshwater species.

Authors:  Julian D Olden; Mark J Kennard; Joshua J Lawler; N Leroy Poff
Journal:  Conserv Biol       Date:  2011-02       Impact factor: 6.560

4.  Invasive species are a leading cause of animal extinctions.

Authors:  Miguel Clavero; Emili García-Berthou
Journal:  Trends Ecol Evol       Date:  2005-01-12       Impact factor: 17.712

5.  Do invasive species perform better in their new ranges?

Authors:  John D Parker; Mark E Torchin; Ruth A Hufbauer; Nathan P Lemoine; Christina Alba; Dana M Blumenthal; Oliver Bossdorf; James E Byers; Alison M Dunn; Robert W Heckman; Martin Hejda; Vojtech Jarosík; Andrew R Kanarek; Lynn B Martin; Sarah E Perkins; Petr Pysek; Kristina Schierenbeck; Carmen Schlöder; Rieks van Klinken; Kurt J Vaughn; Wyatt Williams; Lorne M Wolfe
Journal:  Ecology       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 5.499

6.  A THEORY OF FAUNAL BUILDUP FOR COMPETITION COMMUNITIES.

Authors:  John D Rummel; Jonathan Roughgarden
Journal:  Evolution       Date:  1985-09       Impact factor: 3.694

Review 7.  TEASIng apart alien species risk assessments: a framework for best practices.

Authors:  Brian Leung; Nuria Roura-Pascual; Sven Bacher; Jaakko Heikkilä; Lluis Brotons; Mark A Burgman; Katharina Dehnen-Schmutz; Franz Essl; Philip E Hulme; David M Richardson; Daniel Sol; Montserrat Vilà; Marcel Rejmanek
Journal:  Ecol Lett       Date:  2012-09-30       Impact factor: 9.492

8.  The host-parasite relationship between freshwater crayfish and the crayfish disease fungus Aphanomyces astaci: responses to infection by a susceptible and a resistant species.

Authors:  T Unestam; D W Weiss
Journal:  J Gen Microbiol       Date:  1970-01

Review 9.  Freshwater biodiversity: importance, threats, status and conservation challenges.

Authors:  David Dudgeon; Angela H Arthington; Mark O Gessner; Zen-Ichiro Kawabata; Duncan J Knowler; Christian Lévêque; Robert J Naiman; Anne-Hélène Prieur-Richard; Doris Soto; Melanie L J Stiassny; Caroline A Sullivan
Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc       Date:  2005-12-12

10.  Intensive removal of signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) from rivers increases numbers and taxon richness of macroinvertebrate species.

Authors:  Tom P Moorhouse; Alison E Poole; Laura C Evans; David C Bradley; David W Macdonald
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2014-01-23       Impact factor: 2.912

View more
  3 in total

1.  Invasive alien shredders clear up invasive alien leaf litter.

Authors:  Thomas M Doherty-Bone; Alison M Dunn; Joel Brittain; Lee Eric Brown
Journal:  Ecol Evol       Date:  2018-10-03       Impact factor: 2.912

2.  Total incombustible (mineral) content of Cherax quadricarinatus differs between feral populations in Central-Eastern Australia.

Authors:  Leyton J Tierney; James M Furse; Clyde H Wild
Journal:  PeerJ       Date:  2019-02-01       Impact factor: 2.984

3.  Reduced aggression and foraging efficiency of invasive signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) infested with non-native branchiobdellidans (Annelida: Clitellata).

Authors:  J James; K E Davidson; G Richardson; C Grimstead; J Cable
Journal:  Parasit Vectors       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 3.876

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.