Effects of Common Carp on Reproduction, Growth, and Survival of Largemouth Bass and Bluegills

Abstract

The common carp Cyprinus carpio was introduced to North America more than a century ago, but little research has focused on interactions between this invasive species and native fishes. We used large mesocosms (600 m2) within drainable 0.4‐ha ponds to examine the effects of adult common carp on (1) reproduction of largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides and bluegills Lepomis macrochirus and (2) growth and survival of the larvae and juveniles of these centrarchid species. In separate enclosures, adult bluegills or largemouth bass were stocked with or without common carp. In enclosures with common carp, turbidity was substantially higher, but both centrarchid species spawned and the densities and sizes of larval largemouth bass and bluegills were similar to those of larvae in enclosures without common carp. As juveniles grew, largemouth bass survived at a higher rate but were smaller in enclosures containing common carp compared with largemouth bass in enclosures without common carp. In a second experiment, we stocked known numbers of older juvenile centrarchids into enclosures and found decreased growth for both largemouth bass and bluegills. However, survival of largemouth bass was again higher in enclosures with common carp. Although centrarchid spawning was successful and larval growth and survival did not decrease in the presence of common carp, centrarchid growth slowed at the juvenile stage, probably due to food resource limitation resulting from direct competition with common carp for invertebrate forage, high turbidity caused by common carp, or both of these factors.

Variation in native micro-predator abundance explains recruitment of a mobile invasive fish, the common carp, in a naturally unstable environment

“…These species were the bluegill sunfish, black crappie, black bullhead and green sunfish. Native fish less than a year old (identified by length; Weaver et al 1997;Pope and Willis 1998;Wolfe et al 2009) were excluded from our analysis because they hatch after carp and thus could not have been foraging on carp eggs or larvae. To analyze our data we produced scatter plots to examine possible relationships between YOY carp, native fish, winter DO, and propagule pressure.…”

Invasive carp and prey community composition disrupt trophic cascades in eutrophic ponds

“…Common carp (Cyprinus carpio L.), in particular, are one of the most common and widespread invasive fish species, having been introduced throughout every continent except Antarctica. Common carp consume and alter macrophyte (Crivelli, 1983;Miller & Crowl, 2006;Miller & Provenza, 2007;Matsuzaki et al, 2008) and invertebrate (Parkos et al, 2003;Matsuzaki et al, 2008) communities, compete with native species (Richardson et al, 1990;Zambrano et al, 2010) and, as ecosystem engineers, effect altered environmental conditions which can have ramifications throughout the system (Khan et al, 2003;Parkos et al, 2003;Matsuzaki et al, 2008;Wolfe et al, 2009).…”

“…We hypothesize that our centrarchiddominated systems may be relatively resilient to predation-mediated top-down effects due to decreased foraging efficiency by piscivorous largemouth bass on these prey, which may be exacerbated by reduced foraging efficiency resulting from carp-induced turbidity. Based on known effects of common carp on multiple trophic levels (Khan et al, 2003;Parkos et al, 2003;Matsuzaki et al, 2008;Wolfe et al, 2009), we therefore hypothesize that bottom-up effects will predominate in this system.…”

Sazanın (Cyprinus carpio L., 1758) Tatlısu Ekosistemlerine Etkileri İçin Deneysel Kanıt: Türkiye İç Suları İçin Yönetim Yönlendirmeleri Derlemesi

“…In one of the few experimental studies on the effects on native fish species, C. carpio increased turbidity and reduced macrophyte cover but was found to not affect spawning and larval growth of the native fishes largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides and bluegill Lepomis macrochirus (Wolfe et al 2009). These results were attributed to the nest-guarding reproductive strategies of the two native species, which involve fanning the nest to oxygenate the eggs and prevent silt accumulation on the eggs.…”