Water guns affect abundance and behavior of bigheaded carp and native fish differently

Rivera, Jose M.; Glover, David C.; Kočovský, Patrick M.; Garvey, James E.; Gaikowski, Mark P.; Jensen, Nathan R.; Adams, Ryan F.

doi:10.1007/s10530-017-1624-9

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some success has been observed with the use of acoustic bubble curtains to target the relatively specialised hearing system of invasive carp relative to the wider community (Zielinski et al, 2014;Zielinski and Sorensen, 2016), but again these studies did not directly quantify effects on native species. Indeed, where the effects of acoustic deterrents on native species have been robustly evaluated, the impact was more severe than on the target AIS taxa (Rivera et al, 2018). No studies evaluating the use of light to deter AIS also assessed the impact on native species (Ruebush et al, 2012;Stamplecoskie et al, 2012;Miehls et al, 2017).…”

Section: Effects Of Ais Exclusion Barriers On Native Faunamentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, differences in jumping behaviour, swimming capacity, body size, hearing sensitivity, and response to chemical cues have all been exploited in the design of selective barriers. However, testing on native species has been limited, and there are examples of native fauna being more impacted than the target AIS (e.g., Vélez-Espino et al, 2011;Rivera et al, 2018). Also, selective barrier designs that have worked under laboratory conditions can fail when tested in the field (e.g., Zielinski and Sorensen, 2015).…”

Section: Conclusion and Future Development Of Barrier Management For Ais Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Use of Barriers to Limit the Spread of Aquatic Invasive Animal Species: A Global Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aquatic invasive species (AIS) are one of the principal threats to freshwater biodiversity. Exclusion barriers are increasingly being used as a management strategy to control the spread of AIS. However, exclusion barriers can also impact native organisms and their effectiveness is likely to be context dependent. We conducted a quantitative literature review to evaluate the use of barriers to control animal AIS in freshwater ecosystems worldwide. The quantitative aspect of the review was supplemented by case studies that describe some of the challenges, successes, and opportunities for the use of the use of AIS exclusion barriers globally. Barriers have been used since the 1950s to control the spread of AIS, but effort has been increasing since 2005 (80% of studies) and an increasingly diverse range of AIS taxa are now targeted in a wide range of habitat types. The global use of AIS barriers has been concentrated in North America (74% of studies), Australasia (11%), and Europe (10%). Physical barriers (e.g., weirs, exclusion screens, and velocity barriers) have been most widely used (47%), followed by electric (27%) and chemical barriers (12%). Fish were the most targeted taxa (86%), followed by crustaceans (10%), molluscs (3%) and amphibians (1%). Most studies have been moderately successful in limiting the passage of AIS, with 86% of the barriers tested deterring >70% of individuals. However, only 25% of studies evaluated barrier impacts on native species, and development of selective passage is still in its infancy. Most studies have been too short (47% < 1 year, 87% < 5 years) to detect ecological impacts or have failed to use robust before-after-control-impact (BACI) study designs (only 5%). Hence, more effective monitoring is required to assess the long-term effectiveness of exclusion barriers as an AIS management tool. Our global case studies highlight the pressing need for AIS control in many ecoregions, and exclusion barriers have the potential to become an effective tool in some situations. However, the design and operation of exclusion barriers must be refined to deliver selective passage of native fauna, and exclusion barriers should only be used sparingly as part of a wider integrated management strategy.

show abstract

Section: Effects Of Ais Exclusion Barriers On Native Faunamentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Conclusion and Future Development Of Barrier Management For Ais Controlmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Use of Barriers to Limit the Spread of Aquatic Invasive Animal Species: A Global Review

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Assess potential for avoidance of essential habitat areas, including reefs or other spawning, mating, or foraging sites. Recent evidence shows that some fish may avoid reef sites, aggregate in lower densities (Simpson et al 2011, Paxton et al 2017, or their distribution (Bruce et al 2018) and abundance (Rivera et al 2018) may be affected after exposure to elevated noise levels. Studies of impacts on key habitat areas, such as monitoring utilization of key spawning grounds before and after surveys, can help delineate population-level consequences.…”

Section: Overview Of Knowledge Gapsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Critical information gaps remain in understanding impacts of industrial seismic surveys on marine vertebrates

Elliott¹,

Read²,

Godley³

et al. 2019

Endang. Species. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anthropogenic noise is increasing throughout the world's oceans. One major contributor is industrial seismic surveys -a process typically undertaken to locate and estimate the quantity of oil and gas deposits beneath the seafloor -which, in recent years, has increased in magnitude and scope in some regions. Regulators permit this activity despite widespread uncertainties regarding the potential ecological impacts of seismic surveys and gaps in baseline information on some key species of conservation concern. Research to date suggests that impacts vary, from displacement to direct mortality, but these effects remain poorly understood for most species. Here, we summarize potential effects of seismic surveys, describe key knowledge gaps, and recommend broad-scale research priorities for 3 impacted taxonomic groups: fish, marine mammals, and sea turtles. We also suggest further technological advances, improved mitigation measures, and better policy and management structures to minimize the ecological impacts of seismic surveys in light of scientific uncertainty.

show abstract

“…Researchers commonly use acoustic telemetry as a tool to track the fine‐scale locations of individual fish. Examples include Cupp, Erickson, and Fredricks (2017), who demonstrated CO 2 may be a possible deterrent for Asian carp; Rivera, Glover, and Kocovsky (2018), who demonstrated water guns did not deter Asian carp; and Murchy, Cupp, and Amberg (2017), who demonstrated sound may be a possible deterrent for Asian carp. Also worth noting is follow‐up research that CO 2 changed caused Asian carp to avoid a barrier deterrent, but using air alone did not cause Asian carp to avoid a barrier deterrent (Cupp, personal observation).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Markov chains to quantitatively assess movement patterns of invasive fishes impacted by a carbon dioxide barrier in outdoor ponds

Borland

Mulcahy

Bennie

et al. 2020

Natural Resource Modeling

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Natural resource managers use barriers to deter the movement of aquatic invasive species. Research and development of new invasive species barriers is often evaluated in pond and field scales using high‐resolution telemetry data. Telemetry data sets can be a rich source of data about fish movement and behavior but can be difficult to analyze due to the size of these data sets as well as their irregular sampling intervals. Due to the challenges, most barrier studies only use summary endpoints, such as barrier passage counts or average (e.g., mean or median) fish distance from the barrier, to describe the data. To examine more fine‐scale fish movement patterns, we developed a first‐order Markov chain. We then used this model to help understand the impacts of a barrier on fish behavior. For our study system, we used data from a previous study examining how bighead and silver carp (two invasive fish species in the United States) responded to a carbon dioxide (CO2) barrier in a pond. Considerations for management Based upon our findings, management considerations include: Markov chains can be used to describe and quantify movement patterns of aquatic organisms responding to barriers. These models provide insight not possible with previously used summary approaches. The CO2 barrier changed both the locations of fish and movement patterns of fish. The changes in movement were not captured using conventional endpoints. Specifically, fish had less random movement patterns during periods of CO2 exposure. This provides evidence that bighead and silver carp actively avoided areas with CO2 and also shows that our approach can help assess random versus nonrandom movements

show abstract

Water guns affect abundance and behavior of bigheaded carp and native fish differently

Cited by 4 publications

References 18 publications

The Use of Barriers to Limit the Spread of Aquatic Invasive Animal Species: A Global Review

The Use of Barriers to Limit the Spread of Aquatic Invasive Animal Species: A Global Review

Critical information gaps remain in understanding impacts of industrial seismic surveys on marine vertebrates

Using Markov chains to quantitatively assess movement patterns of invasive fishes impacted by a carbon dioxide barrier in outdoor ponds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About