Biological control of invasive fish and aquatic invertebrates: a brief review with case studies

Abstract

An increasing threat to U.S. waterways is the establishment and spread of invasive and injurious fishes. A species may be designated by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) as federally "injurious" under the Lacey Act (18 U.S.C. 42) either if that species causes harm (injury) without establishing and spreading (not invasive), or if that species causes harm after establishment and spread (invasive). Species designated as injurious are prohibited from being imported, which is a highly effective way of preventing invasions by nonnative species. We developed a decision-support, riskassessment system to aid USFWS's prioritization of species for injuriousness. Our system is based on USFWS's evaluation criteria of a species' potential injuriousness and consists of a semi-quantitative, rapid-assessment procedure called the Ecological Risk Screening Summary (ERSS) and a quantitative probability network model called the Freshwater Fish Injurious Species Risk Assessment Model (FISRAM). ERSS provides information on a species' history of invasiveness elsewhere in the world, and on its biology and ecology, potential or known effects of introduction, global and domestic distribution, and climate associations, and provides conclusions on potential risk of invasiveness. FISRAM calculates expected probability of injuriousness as a function of species potential establishment, spread, and harm, based on probable effects on native species and ecosystems, suitability of climate and habitat in introduced areas, ease of dispersal and transport, and harm to humans. FISRAM is used to assess risk probability when ERSS categorizes invasion risk as uncertain. We calibrated and updated the probability structure of FISRAM using a data set of 50 species with known invasiveness outcomes. We demonstrate the use of these two models for risk assessment and decision-support in identifying and documenting species for potential risk management actions, such as listing wildlife as injurious under the Lacey Act.

A review on introduced Cichla spp. and emerging concerns

“…For instance, two-day-old Cichla larvae predates on developing crustaceans and rotifers ( Zaret, 1980 ; Winemiller, 1997 ), the juvenile feeds on insects, shrimps, and atherinids ( Zaret 1980 ; Winemiller, 1997 ; Jepsen et al., 1997 ) whereas, adult Cichla spp. feeds on fish like poecilids, characids, eleotrids and cichlids with some instances of canibalism ( Shafland, 1999a ; Hill et al., 2005 ; Neal et al., 2017 ; Pereira et al., 2017 ; Sales et al., 2018 ; Bajer et al., 2019 ; Bezzera et al., 2019 ; Golani et al., 2019 ; Santos et al., 2019 ).…”

Invasive lionfish detected in estuaries in the northern Gulf of Mexico using environmental DNA

“…Current knowledge of impacts of invasive lionfish on food web dynamics suggests native predators will not be sufficient (Albins and Hixon 2008) (DeRoy et al 2020). Other methods of biological control, such as genetic techniques or the use of viruses, may be highly effective, but require careful consideration due to potential unintended consequences (Bajer et al 2019). The recent report of an ulcerative disease found in invasive lionfish suggests they may be vulnerable to biological control measures, but there is concern that native fish could also be susceptible (Harris et al 2020).…”

Fisheries Volume 45 Number 6 June 2020

“…Removals sanctioned under the EAHCP have been conducted since 2013 through contracted spearfi shing and public tournaments aimed at removal and composting of invasive SAC, tilapia Oreochromis spp., nutria Myocastor coypus , red-rim melania Melonoides tuberculate , and ramshorn snails Phanorbarius corneus . Public involvement and tournament-based participation represent application of emerging methods in invasive species control such as harvest incentives (Pasko and Goldberg 2014 ) and biocontrol by humans (Bajer et al 2019 ). However, the effectiveness of the EAHCP program at reducing biomass of invasive SAC is not currently assessed.…”