Biological Monitoring in Freshwater Habitats 2009
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4020-9278-7_10
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Monitoring Biological Invasions in Freshwater Habitats

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…2010), are likely to prove an effective means of control as part of integrated carp management actions in impacted areas (Brown & Walker 2004). However, as emphasised by Vilá and García‐Berthou (2010) prevention and early detection still represent the real fail‐safe and cost‐effective management strategy that environmental scientists and managers alike should be pursuing Vilá and García‐Berthou (2010)..…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…2010), are likely to prove an effective means of control as part of integrated carp management actions in impacted areas (Brown & Walker 2004). However, as emphasised by Vilá and García‐Berthou (2010) prevention and early detection still represent the real fail‐safe and cost‐effective management strategy that environmental scientists and managers alike should be pursuing Vilá and García‐Berthou (2010)..…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In Israel, Goren and Galil (2005) also pointed to the need for better research and risk assessment before allowing further introductions. In Spain, Vilá and García‐Berthou (2010) suggested implementation of a suite of strategies consisting of: (1) prevention and early detection; (2) direct management (although regarded as expensive and often unsuccessful); and (3) active/passive restoration following removal. Finally, in Turkey, Çetinkaya (2006) emphasised the need for more detailed impact assessments to achieve better understanding of the current status and effects of introduced species.…”
Section: Managementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nonetheless, the invasion of freshwater ecosystems is recognized as a problem of global concern, and the management of aquatic IAS is also a difficult challenge [14][15][16] because the highly interconnected hydrographic system of inland waters acts as a corridor for their spread. Furthermore, IAS show high ecological adaptation, and some of them have already invaded freshwater ecosystems, becoming an important part of freshwater communities, both in terms of the number of species and biomass, leading to biodiversity loss and environmental homogenization [17,18].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Like most semi‐aquatic mammals introduced in Europe, the coypu Myocastor coypus (or nutria) is a successful colonizer of freshwater ecosystems, substantially disturbing aquatic vegetation through grazing and undermining riverbanks by burrowing (Bertolino & Genovesi, ). It is included in the list of the 100 World's Worst Invasive Alien Species (Bertolino, ) and in the list of the 10 invasive species with the highest number of impact types on ecosystem services (Vilà et al ., ,). In Italy, coypu eat more than 100 plant species (Scaravelli, ), including some classified as endangered or vulnerable.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In all of these strategies, monitoring plays a major role for understanding the invasion process and assessing the status of alien species (Rooney et al, 2004) and whether control measures are working (Campbell et al, 2002). In Europe, monitoring schemes for invasive species are still inadequate and the development of robust and cost-effective monitoring tools must be a key objective of ongoing strategies (Vilà & García-Berthou, 2010).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%