The effects of 2 coexisting crayfish on an Appalachian river community

Helms, Brian S.; Creed, Robert P.

doi:10.1899/0887-3593(2005)024<0113:teocco>2.0.co;2

Cited by 52 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This reduction may reflect habitat preferences of most Caenis spp. for fine sediment accumulations which makes them prone to ingestion or physical disturbance by foraging crayfish (Capelli, 1980;Gutierrez-Yurrita et al, 1998;Usio and Townsend, 2004;Helms and Creed, 2005).…”

Section: Taxa-crayfish Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The long-term effects of invasive signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) on instream macroinvertebrate communities

Mathers

Chadd

Dunbar

et al. 2016

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Taxa-crayfish Interactionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The long-term effects of invasive signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) on instream macroinvertebrate communities

Mathers

Chadd

Dunbar

et al. 2016

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The absence of C. chasmodactylus YOY in the South Fork was unexpected given the density of adults (up to 3/m 2 in some habitats, Fortino, 2000;Helms & Creed, 2005). The presence of adult C. chasmodactylus in the South Fork and the presence of habitats comparable to those occupied by both adults and YOY of this species in third order streams (Fortino & Creed, pers.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although these crayfish occur in the South Fork at high densities (Fortino, 2000), analysis of their gut contents suggests that they are not important predators on YOY crayfish or any other macroinvertebrates for that matter (Helms & Creed, 2005). This species consumes fine sediments and detritus as adults; animal prey were rarely encountered in their guts (Helms & Creed, 2005).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Crayfish often dominate the invertebrate biomass in lotic systems (Huryn & Wallace, 1987;Creed, 1990;Griffith et al, 1994) and can affect community structure and ecosystem processes (Huryn & Wallace, 1987;Creed, 1994;Parkyn et al, 1997;Usio, 2000;Creed & Reed, 2004;Helms & Creed, 2005). Distribution and abundance of particular lotic crayfish species has been attributed to abiotic factors (Rhoades, 1962;Flinders & Magoulick, 2003), competition (Bovbjerg, 1970;Flynn & Hobbs, 1984;Rabeni, 1985) and fish predation (Mather & Stein, 1993;Englund, 1999;Usio & Townsend, 2000;Seiler & Turner, 2004), Some researchers have suggested that changes in abiotic factors or the presence of competitors or predators across watersheds may influence crayfish distributions (e.g., Bovbjerg, 1970;Flynn & Hobbs, 1984;Englund, 1999;Flinders & Magoulick, 2003).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Orconectes cristavarius is the dominant crayfish species in the South Fork; both the young-of-the-year (YOY) and adults of this species are common. The adults of C. chasmodactylus are common in the South Fork and its third-order tributaries (Fortino, 2000;Helms & Creed, 2005), but the YOY of C. chasmodactylus occur only in the tributaries despite evidence that this species successfully reproduces in the South Fork (Brown, 1999;Fortino & Creed, pers. obs.).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Abiotic factors, competition or predation: what determines the distribution of young crayfish in a watershed?

Fortino

Creed

2006

Hydrobiologia

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the headwaters of the New River in western North Carolina, the dominant crayfish species changes with increasing stream size. One transition occurs between third-and fourth-order streams. Cambarus chasmodactylus is the dominant species in third-order tributaries. Orconectes cristavarius is the dominant species in the fourth-order South Fork of the New River. While adult C. chasmodactylus are present in the South Fork, the young-of-the-year (YOY) of this species are absent despite evidence of reproduction. In this study we evaluated the factors that may be responsible for the absence of C. chasmodactylus YOY from the South Fork. A field experiment was used to evaluate the role of abiotic factors and competition with YOY O. cristavarius. There was no significant effect of either of these factors on mortality or growth of C. chasmodactylus YOY. The growth rate of O. cristavarius was 3· faster than that of C. chasmodactylus in this experiment. Since neither abiotic factors nor competition appeared responsible for the exclusion of C. chasmodactylus YOY from the South Fork we evaluated the potential importance of selective predation by rock bass (Ambloplites rupestris), a fish species that is common in the South Fork but virtually absent in the tributaries. In a laboratory experiment, C. chasmodactylus YOY experienced significantly higher mortality than O. cristavarius YOY in the presence of rock bass. Field observations and a laboratory experiment suggest that the two crayfish species differ in their anti-predator behaviors. Cambarus chasmodactylus was less likely to swim when initially disturbed and swam shorter distances than O. cristavarius. The differences in escape behavior and growth rate may contribute to the differences in the vulnerability of the two species to rock bass predation. Our results suggest that intense predation pressure exerted by the rock bass may contribute to the virtual exclusion of C. chasmodactylus YOY from the fourth-order South Fork.

show abstract

The importance of biotic entrainment for base flow fluvial sediment transport

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Sediment transport is regarded as an abiotic process driven by geophysical energy, but zoogeomorphological activity indicates that biological energy can also fuel sediment movements. It is therefore prudent to measure the contribution that biota make to sediment transport, but comparisons of abiotic and biotic sediment fluxes are rare. For a stream in the UK, the contribution of crayfish bioturbation to suspended sediment flux was compared with the amount of sediment moved by hydraulic forcing. During base flow periods, biotic fluxes can be isolated because nocturnal crayfish activity drives diel turbidity cycles, such that nighttime increases above daytime lows are attributable to sediment suspension by crayfish. On average, crayfish bioturbation contributed at least 32% (474 kg) to monthly base flow suspended sediment loads; this biotic surcharge added between 5.1 and 16.1 t (0.21 to 0.66 t km−2 yr−1) to the annual sediment yield. As anticipated, most sediment was moved by hydraulic forcing during floods and the biotic contribution from baseflow periods represented between 0.46 and 1.46% of the annual load. Crayfish activity is nonetheless an important impact during baseflow periods and the measured annual contribution may be a conservative estimate because of unusually prolonged flooding during the measurement period. In addition to direct sediment entrainment by bioturbation, crayfish burrowing supplies sediment to the channel for mobilization during floods so that the total biotic effect of crayfish is potentially greater than documented in this study. These results suggest that in rivers, during base flow periods, bioturbation can entrain significant quantities of fine sediment into suspension with implications for the aquatic ecosystem and base flow sediment fluxes. Energy from life rather than from elevation can make significant contributions to sediment fluxes.

show abstract

The effects of 2 coexisting crayfish on an Appalachian river community

Cited by 52 publications

References 33 publications

The long-term effects of invasive signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) on instream macroinvertebrate communities

The long-term effects of invasive signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) on instream macroinvertebrate communities

Abiotic factors, competition or predation: what determines the distribution of young crayfish in a watershed?

The importance of biotic entrainment for base flow fluvial sediment transport

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About