Abundance and night-time habitat use patterns of Ponto-Caspian gobiid species (Pisces, Gobiidae) in the littoral zone of the River Danube, Hungary

Abstract

We examined the abundance and meso-habitat use of gobiid species during both day and night along 43 stretches (500-m long) of the littoral zone at five locations of the Middle Danube, Hungary, in spring and in summer 2004. Electrofishing catch per unit effort sampling revealed significantly higher relative densities at night than during the day. Gobiids occupied all the available habitats encountered during sampling. Habitat-abundance relationships from night-time samples revealed that the two most abundant species, round goby Neogobius melanostomus and bighead goby Neogobius kessleri, were found in highest relative density along gravel beach and artificial rip-rap habitats; these species were in relatively low density in sandy areas. Monkey goby Neogobius fluviatilis was more abundant in natural shorelines than in rip-rap habitats and dispersed more consistently between sandy and gravel beaches. Tubenose goby Proterorhinus marmoratus demonstrated great plasticity in meso-habitat use. In conclusion, Ponto-Caspian gobies occurred rather consistently along the Hungarian section of the Danube, occupying all available habitats examined. Abundance-habitat relations suggest plasticity in meso-habitat use but partial segregation between species. Further studies are required at multiple spatial scales to assess how micro-and meso-habitat use varies with fluctuating population densities.

Can the presence of alien Ponto–Caspian gobies affect shelter use by the native European bullhead?

“…Assuming that shelter occupancy differs between day and night, not only season but also time of the day should influence the magnitude of interference between the bullhead and both goby species. Bottom-dwelling fishes such as bullheads and some Ponto-Caspian gobies are usually nocturnal, seeking a hiding place during the day and being most active at dusk or at night (Tomlinson and Perrow 2003;Erös et al 2005;Johnson et al 2008;Gaygusuz et al 2010;Grabowska et al 2016). On the other hand, shelter occupancy by the monkey goby did not differ between night and day, which corroborates the lack of a clear diel pattern of its foraging activity (Grabowska et al 2009).…”

“…This species reveals a morphological specialization for sandy substrata (Č ápová et al 2008), and in newly invaded ecosystems, it is often found on sandy bottom, e.g. in the Vistula River system (Danilkiewicz 1998;Kostrzewa and Grabowski 2002), Danube (Holčik et al 2003;Erös et al 2005;Polačik et al 2008) and Rhine (Borcherding et al 2011). Throughout the year, monkey gobies were caught usually on sand except for the spawning season when they occupied artificial shelters (Kakareko 2011).…”

Colonisation of the Rhine basin by non-native gobiids: an update of the situation in France

“…(Eros et al, 2005;Harka and Biro, 2007) and in the lower Rhine (Borcherding et al, 2011). These low abundances imply a lower probability of being pumped up into the ballasts and thus may also explain why, conversely to the two other species, the Western tubenose goby would not have expanded through inland navigation.…”

A review of Gobiid expansion along the Danube-Rhine corridor – geopolitical change as a driver for invasion

“…This is unlikely, however, as it is more probable that the Slovak individuals are part of the same introduction into Austrian waters 50 km upstream (see Wiesner, 2005), probably via ship to the Viennese port of Hafen Lobau. This is all the more likely as, despite intensive sampling efforts, no specimens were caught along the Hungarian (Erös, 2005;Erös et al, 2005) or Slovak (Jurajda et al, 2005) …”