Littoral Fish Community Response to Smallmouth Bass Removal from an Adirondack Lake

Weidel, Brian C.; Josephson, Daniel C.; Kraft, Clifford E.

doi:10.1577/t06-091.1

Cited by 69 publications

(70 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Of the case studies examined, 16 showed evidence of compensatory recruitment (Table 3. 1). Of case studies showing signs of compensation, the increase in juvenile and overall abundance was sufficient in five cases to suggest overcompensation may have occurred (Smith et al 1996, Meyer et al 2006, Weidel et al 2007, Thuesen et al 2011, Shepard et al 2014. The majority of unsuccessful removal efforts showed evidence of compensation (Fisher's exact p < 0.001; Table 3.2), though compensation appeared to have occurred in a few efforts that resulted in the successful reduction or eradication of the target species.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…In 5 cases studies, the increase in juvenile and overall abundance was sufficient to suggest overcompensation may have occurred (Smith et al 1996, Meyer et al 2006, Weidel et al 2007, Thuesen et al 2011, Shepard et al 2014). All removal efforts containing evidence of compensation utilized only physical methods.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Overcompensation occurs when population size increases as a result of the increase in the number of juveniles (Smith et al 1996, Meyer et al 2006, Weidel et al 2007, Thuesen et al 2011. As overall abundances of Carcinus in Bodega Harbor not only failed to increase but in fact declined post-removal, our data do not support the conclusion that overcompensation occurred in Bodega Harbor.…”

Section: Contrary To Our Findings Bückman and Adelung (1964) Found Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…insects (Nicholson 1954, Postma et al 1994, Moe et al 2002 and fish (Smith et al 1996, Meyer et al 2006, Weidel et al 2007, Ohlberger et al 2011, Thuesen et al 2011). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, a seven year electrofishing effort to remove an invasive population of small mouth bass (Micropterus dolomieu) from Little Moose Lake, New York, resulted in a massive increase in juvenile abundance, causing a large increase in overall bass abundance (Weidel et al 2007, Zipkin et al 2008. Similar efforts to remove other invasive freshwater fish populations also coincided with increased juvenile abundance, causing an overall increase in population size (Smith et al 1996, Meyer et al 2006).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Responses of Aquatic Non-Native Species to Novel Predator Cues and Increased Mortality

Turner¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lethal biotic interactions strongly influence the potential for aquatic non-native species to establish and endure in habitats to which they are introduced. Predators in the recipient area, including native and previously established non-native predators, can prevent establishment, limit habitat use, and reduce abundance of non-native species.Management efforts by humans using methods designed to cause mass mortality (e.g., trapping, biocide applications) can reduce or eradicate non-native populations. However, the impacts of predator and human induced mortality may be mitigated by the behavior or population-level responses of a given non-native species.My dissertation examined the responses of non-native aquatic species to the risk of predation by novel (i.e., no previous exposure) predators in the recipient community Increases in recruitment rates can occur as a result of efforts to remove non-native species. This increase in recruitment can result in overcompensation, but more commonly results in compensation, where recruitment rates increase relative to pre-removal recruitment but does not result in in the population's abundance exceeding pre-removal iv levels. However, a detailed and accurate prediction of the response of a population to harvest is time consuming and data intensive. This is not feasible for most efforts to eradicate non-native species, which have the greatest chance of success when enacted rapidly after detection. For my final chapter, I performed a literature review and accompanying statistical analysis to determine if typically available information related to the removal effort (site size, site connectivity, and removal technique) could be used to determine increased risk of compensation for a given effort to remove aquatic invasive species. Compensation was closely linked to unsuccessful removal efforts and was observed only among efforts utilizing physical removal methods. However, the frequency with which compensation occurred varied with the exact technique employed, occurring most frequently in removal utilizing electrofishing. Additionally, evidence of compensation was more frequent among larger removal areas with variable connectivity.While other predictors (temperature, effort, etc) might add to the predicative power, the findings of the review provide criteria for managers to determine the relative risk of compensation prior to the start of removal.Further understanding of how invasive species respond to lethal biotic interactions, including anthropogenically mediated control measures, can aid in assessing the risk of invasion for a given species and inform managers of the risk of complications resulting from removal efforts. While inducible defenses may contribute to the long-term success of an introduced species in their recipient range, my findings did not support the idea that inducible defenses triggered by predator cues contributed to their initial introduction in this case. However, research on other non-native species and offspring of

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Contrary To Our Findings Bückman and Adelung (1964) Found Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…insects (Nicholson 1954, Postma et al 1994, Moe et al 2002 and fish (Smith et al 1996, Meyer et al 2006, Weidel et al 2007, Ohlberger et al 2011, Thuesen et al 2011). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Responses of Aquatic Non-Native Species to Novel Predator Cues and Increased Mortality

Turner¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Centrarchid Identification and Natural History

Warren

2009

Centrarchid Fishes

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The family Ccntrarchidae (Order: Perciformes) is one of the most diverse, widespread, and conspicuous fish families native to freshwater habitats of North America. Aniong endemic fish families of North America, only the North American catfish family (lctaluridae) has more species. The family name, Centrarchidae. refers to the anal fin spines of species in the family, and the common name. sunfishes, to the bright breeding colors displayed by males of some species in the family. Because of their diversity, wide distribution, and economic value, some of the earliest taxonomic descriptions and natural history observations on North American freshwater fishes focused on the centrarchids (e.g., Linnaeus 1758; Lacépède 1801; Rafinesque 1820; Abbott 1870).The family contains 34 extant species classified in eight genera, but morphological and genetic evidence suggests that additional, but currently unrecognized, diversity exists within most of the genera. The most diverse genus. Lepomis. the bream (or panfish) of anglers, is comprised of 13 extant species, but at least 8 of these show evidence of polytypy (e.g.. Bermingham and Avise 1986; Fox 1997;Harris 2005). The genus Micropterus, referred to collectively as black basses (Philipp and Ridgway 2002), contains eight extant species. but again, at least three species are polytypic (e.g., Stark and Echelle 1998;Kassler 2002;Miller 2005). The genera Anthloplites (rock basses). Enoeacaothus (banded sunfishes). and Poo,o.vis (crappies) contain four, three, and two extant species, respectively, and at least one species each of Ambloplites and Enneacaothus is polytypic (Koppelman 2000; T. Darden, South Carolina Department of Natural Resources, personal communication). The genera Acantha echos, Archoplites. and Centrorchos are monotypic. but populations of both Acantliarchus poniotis and Archoplites lolerruptus show geographical patterns of morphological divergence (Cashner ci (il. 1989;Moyle 2002).The natural range of extant centrarchids is confined primarily to warm, freshwater habitats in North America east of the western continental divide except for the Sacramento perch (A. interrupius). whose native range is west of the divide in the Central Valley of California (San Joaquin-Sacramento. Pajaro. Salinas river drainages. Moyle 2002). The northern natural continental limit of the family is occupied by members of Leponiis. Ainhiopliles, Poinoxis, and Microptertis in the St. Lawrence River. northern Great Lakes. and southwestern Hudson Bay drainages in eastern Canada (Scott and Ciossman 1973). The Rio Conchos (Rio Grande drainage) (Lepomis) and Rio Soto la Marina (Micmpterus. Miller and Smith 1986;Miller 2005) of northern Mexico delimit the southern continental limits of the native range of extant centrarchids. The Mississippi River Basin and, to a lesser extent, the Gulf and Atlantic Slope drainages harbor the most diverse assemblages of native centrarchids (Warren ci (il. 2000). The native ranges of Po,noxis and Lepomis largely coincide with that of Micropierus, but both exte...

show abstract

Nearshore fish assemblages associated with introduced predatory fishes in lakes

Trumpickas

Mandrak

Ricciardi

2011

Aquatic Conserv: Mar. Freshw. Ecosyst.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT1. Changes to native fish assemblages in lakes are commonly associated with introduced predatory fishes. How fish assemblages change as multiple predatory species are introduced is not well understood.2. This study investigated the relationship between the presence of introduced large-bodied predatory fishes (largemouth bass Micropterus salmoides, pike Esox lucius, rock bass Ambloplites rupestris, smallmouth bass Micropterus dolomieu, walleye Sander vitreus) and the composition of native fish assemblages in littoral areas of 40 lakes in Algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario, Canada. Fish assemblages were compared across lakes of different predator composition, and within lakes before and after recent predator invasions.3. The presence of an introduced predator was associated with significantly different native fish assemblages across lakes, after controlling for environmental and spatial variables.4. Native fish assemblages did not significantly vary across lakes with more than one predator species. Furthermore, while declines in native species richness over time were observed in a number of lakes, these were not associated with introductions of additional predators.5. Several small-bodied species (brook stickleback Culea inconstans, fathead minnow Pimephales promelas, finescale dace Chrosomus neogaeus, and northern redbelly dace Chrosomus eos) consistently showed strong negative correlations with predator presence.6. The results suggest that predatory fish introductions alter native fish assemblages and that this impact is consistent regardless of the number of predatory species introduced.

show abstract

Littoral Fish Community Response to Smallmouth Bass Removal from an Adirondack Lake

Cited by 69 publications

References 36 publications

Responses of Aquatic Non-Native Species to Novel Predator Cues and Increased Mortality

Responses of Aquatic Non-Native Species to Novel Predator Cues and Increased Mortality

Centrarchid Identification and Natural History

Nearshore fish assemblages associated with introduced predatory fishes in lakes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About