Contrasting ecological impacts of native and non‑native marine crabs: a global meta-analysis

Howard, Brett; Therriault, Thomas W.; Côté, Isabelle M.

doi:10.3354/meps12245

Cited by 19 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Since lobsters' response to both green crab and rock crab was similar, it demonstrated impacts on lobster catch were not specific to green crab but were rather due to the presence of either crab species in the traps. This finding aligns with those of Howard, Therriault & Côté (2017) which found non-native crabs did not reduce prey abundance via direct consumption any more than native crabs. Howard, Therriault & Côté (2017) also reported on the paucity of studies that directly compared impacts of native versus non-native species.…”

Section: Procedural Controlsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…This finding aligns with those of Howard, Therriault & Côté (2017) which found non-native crabs did not reduce prey abundance via direct consumption any more than native crabs. Howard, Therriault & Côté (2017) also reported on the paucity of studies that directly compared impacts of native versus non-native species. Had we not incorporated a procedural control, our conclusion would likely have been that green crab caused declines in trap effectiveness, with the implication that something about their identity as an invader was the root cause.…”

Section: Procedural Controlsupporting

confidence: 91%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A field-based investigation of behavioural interactions between invasive green crab (Carcinus maenas), rock crab (Cancer irroratus), and American lobster (Homarus americanus) in southern Newfoundland

Zargarpour

McKenzie

Favaro

2020

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marine species invasions pose a global threat to native biodiversity and commercial fisheries. The European green crab (Carcinus maenas) is one of the most successful marine invaders worldwide and has, in the last decade, invaded the southern and western coastal waters of the island of Newfoundland, Newfoundland and Labrador (NL), Canada. Impacts of green crab on the American lobster (Homarus americanus), which are native to Newfoundland, are not well understood, particularly for interactions around deployed fishing gear. Declines in lobster catch rates in invaded systems (i.e., Placentia Bay, NL), have prompted concerns among lobster fishers that green crab are interfering with lobster catch. Here, we conducted a field experiment in a recently-invaded bay (2013) in which we deployed lobster traps pre-stocked with green crab, native rock crab (Cancer irroratus) (a procedural control), or empty (control). We compared catch per unit effort across each category, and used underwater cameras to directly observe trap performance in situ. In addition, we used SCUBA surveys to determine the correlation between ambient density of lobster and green crab in the ecosystem and the catch processes of lobster in traps. We found: (1) Regardless of the species of crab stocked, crab presence reduced the total number of lobster that attempted to enter the trap, and also reduced entry success rate, (2) lobster consumed green crab, rock crab and other lobster inside traps and (3) there was a positive association between lobster catch and ambient lobster density. Our results suggest that while there was a relationship between in-trap crab density and trap catch rates, it was not linked to the non-native/native status of the crab species.

show abstract

Section: Procedural Controlsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Procedural Controlsupporting

confidence: 91%

A field-based investigation of behavioural interactions between invasive green crab (Carcinus maenas), rock crab (Cancer irroratus), and American lobster (Homarus americanus) in southern Newfoundland

Zargarpour

McKenzie

Favaro

2020

PeerJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since lobsters' response to both green crab and rock crab was similar, it demonstrated impacts on lobster catch were not specific to green crab but were rather due to the presence of either crab species in the traps. This finding aligns with those of Howard et al, (2017) which found non-native crabs did not reduce prey abundance via direct consumption any more than native crabs. Howard et al, (2017) also reported on the paucity of studies that directly compared impacts of native versus non-native species.…”

Section: Procedural Controlsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…This finding aligns with those of Howard et al, (2017) which found non-native crabs did not reduce prey abundance via direct consumption any more than native crabs. Howard et al, (2017) also reported on the paucity of studies that directly compared impacts of native versus non-native species. Had we not incorporated a procedural control, our conclusion would likely have been that green crab caused declines in trap effectiveness, with the implication that something about their identity as an invader was the root cause.…”

Section: Procedural Controlsupporting

confidence: 91%

Peer Review #3 of "A field-based investigation of behavioural interactions between invasive green crab (Carcinus maenas), rock crab (Cancer irroratus), and American lobster (Homarus americanus) in southern Newfoundland (v0.2)"

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this respect, meta-analyses employing quantitative methods are conceivably more objective than review articles, because they should be less susceptible to preconceived notions. Although some meta-analyses concluded that the impacts of NIS are stronger and/ or more detrimental than those of indigenous species (Ferlian et al, 2018;Paolucci, MacIsaac, & Ricciardi, 2013;Salo, Korpimaki, Banks, Nordstrom, & Dickman, 2007;Simberloff, Souza, Nuñez, Barrios-Garcia, & Bunn, 2012;van Hengstum, Hooftman, Oostermeijer, Tienderen, & Mack, 2014;Vilá et al, 2011;Wood et al, 2017;Yoon & Read, 2016), many suggested positive influences and/or that the purported negative effects of NIS are not supported by evidence (Charlebois, Sargent, & Maherali, 2017;Gurevitch & Padilla, 2004;Norkko et al, 2011;Pintor, Byers, & Anderson, 2015;Radville, Gonda-King, Gómez, Kaplan, & Preisser Evan, 2014;Reise, Olenin, & Thieltges, 2006), and most found variable and context-dependent impacts (Cameron, Vilà, Cabeza, & Sykes, 2016;Guy-Haim et al, 2018;Higgins & Vander Zanden, 2010;Howard, Therriault, & Côté, 2017;Martin, Newton, & Bullock, 2017;Nelson et al, 2017;Potgieter et al, 2017;Pysek et al, 2008;Qiu, 2015;Thomsen et al, 2014;Twardochleb, Olden, & Larson, 2013;Vaz et al, 2018;Ward & Ricciardi, 2007), thus hindering broad generalizations.…”

Section: Interpre Ting and Recon Ciling D Iss Entmentioning

confidence: 99%

Invasive species denialism: Sorting out facts, beliefs, and definitions

Boltovskoy

Sylvester

Paolucci

2018

Ecology and Evolution

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the last decades, thousands of investigations confirmed the detrimental effects of species translocated by man outside of their native ranges (nonindigenous species, or NIS). However, results concluding that many NIS have null, neutral, or positive impacts on the biota and on human interests are as common in the scientific literature as those that point at baneful impacts. Recently, several scholars confronted the stand that origin per se is not a reliable indicator of negative effects, suggesting that such conclusions are the expression of scientific denialism, often led by spurious purposes, and that their numbers are increasing. When assessed in the context of the growing interest in introduced species, the proportion of academic publications claiming that NIS pose no threats to the environment and to social and economic interests is extremely low, and has not increased since 1990. The widely prevailing notion that many NIS are effectively or potentially harmful does not conflict with the fact that most have mixed (negative, neutral, and positive) impacts. When based on solid grounds, reports of positive or neutral impacts should not be labeled as manipulative or misleading unless proven otherwise, even if they may hamper interest in‐ and funding of research and control bioinvasion programs.

show abstract

Contrasting ecological impacts of native and non‑native marine crabs: a global meta-analysis

Cited by 19 publications

References 70 publications

A field-based investigation of behavioural interactions between invasive green crab (Carcinus maenas), rock crab (Cancer irroratus), and American lobster (Homarus americanus) in southern Newfoundland

A field-based investigation of behavioural interactions between invasive green crab (Carcinus maenas), rock crab (Cancer irroratus), and American lobster (Homarus americanus) in southern Newfoundland

Peer Review #3 of "A field-based investigation of behavioural interactions between invasive green crab (Carcinus maenas), rock crab (Cancer irroratus), and American lobster (Homarus americanus) in southern Newfoundland (v0.2)"

Invasive species denialism: Sorting out facts, beliefs, and definitions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About