Spatial and temporal variation in biomass and size structure of Corbicula fluminea in Danube River catchment, Hungary

Abstract

The aim of this study was to reveal the spatial and temporal variation in biomass, density, and size structure of the invasive clam, Corbicula fluminea in the Danube River catchment and to explore the environmental factors determining these patterns. Samples were taken seasonally during the years 2007 and 2008 at 15 sites located along a river continuum from a second order stream to the Danube River. C. fluminea was the most abundant species in the main arm of the Danube; however, it was found in great density in the side arms, too. In the Ipoly River it only occured close to the conjuction, and it was not present at all in the second and third order streams. Regression models were developed to predict dry mass (DW, g) from linear body dimension [shell length (L), mm]. For the description of length-dry mass relationship, the power function (DW = a * L b ) was applied. The highest density, biomass, and mean shell length were 178 ind. m −2 , 24.9697 g DW m −2 , and 21.99 mm, respectively. ANOVA detected significant spatial variation in biomass; however, significant temporal variation was not recorded between the years, only among the seasons. Multiple linear regressions were used to find the relationship between the biomass and the environmental parameters. The coarse and very fine sediment fractions and the high water temperature provided suitable habitat for C. fluminea. Although statistically significant correlation was not detected between the chlorophyll-a content of water and the biomass, the highest biomass values were recorded at sites with high chlorophyll-a value.

Freshwater mollusc assemblages and habitat associations in the Danube River drainage, Hungary

“…rivicola and P . amnicum ) declined or disappeared (Bódis et al ., , ). Theodoxus fluviatilis , which is abundant in the main channel of the Danube, may also have a negative impact on native Theodoxus species ( T .…”

“…Some invasive mollusc species deserve special attention since they can dominate the benthic community in density and biomass triggering significant changes in the structure and functioning of freshwater ecosystems (Strayer et al ., ; Sousa et al ., , , ). In the Danube River Basin the Asian clam, Corbicula fluminea and the Chinese pond mussel, Sinanodonta woodiana became dominant in a short period of time and may impair the conservation of native molluscs (Bódis et al ., , , , , ).…”

Predicting global habitat suitability for Corbicula fluminea using species distribution models: The importance of different environmental datasets

“…It tolerates a wide range of water temperatures (Lucy et al, 2012) and prefers sand and silt sediments with higher organic matter content (Sousa et al, 2008a). The occurrence of pelagic and benthic life stages enables C. fluminea to spread over long distances by ballast water transport in boats (Paunović et al, 2007;Bódis et al, 2012), by currents, and locally by diffusion due to sand extraction (Belz et al, 2012). Passive transport by aquatic birds between water bodies was also observed (Darrigran, 2002;McMahon, 2002).…”

“…The species Corbicula fluminea (Müller, 1744) is considered one of the most efficient freshwater invaders worldwide and is currently found in the 5 continents (Ituarte, 1994;Mouthon, 2001;Ciutti and Cappelletti, 2009;Bódis et al, 2012;Früh et al, 2012;Lucy et al, 2012). This bivalve species is normally found in well oxygenated waters (Belanger, 1991) and is intolerant to high salinity values (McMahon, 1999), low pH (Lucy et al, 2012) and low calcium concentrations (Karatayev et al, 2007).…”

Invasive mollusc faunas of the River Thames exemplify biostratigraphical characterization of the Anthropocene

“…6. The global stratigraphical record of Corbicula fluminea (Martínez 1987;Vincent & Brancotte 2002;Beran 2006;Steffen et al 2007;Aristizábal 2008;Ayres 2008;Elliot & Zu Ermgassen 2008;Sousa et al 2008;Munjiu & Shubernetski 2010;Aldridge et al 2012;Bódis et al 2012;Clavero et al 2012;Schmidlin et al 2012;Hubenov et al 2013;Crespo et al 2015;Molina et al 2015). Ranges extending back further than 1790 (0.227 ka) are considered to be the native range.…”