homogenizing of the world’s flora and fauna
‘biological pollutants’.
I. Invasive species in general
A. Rule of tens
1.
10% of imported plants escape to become introduced
2.
10% of introduced organisms
(found in the wild, released, but not yet breeding successfully)
species become established
(have a self-sustaining natural population)
3.
10% of those established become pests
B. Pattern of establishment and spread of exotic
species
1. LAG phase, before growth
occurs (small numbers, adaptation).
2. During this lag is the
best opportunity for control.
3. Then there is a rapid
expansion of range.
4. Expansion decreases when
all of the suitable habitat is colonized, or when there are barriers to
expansion.
C. Is invasion success predictable?
1. Attributes of invaders –
(not universal)
(resting stages, fast reproducers, generalists, related to other
successful invaders...)
2. Community vulnerability
-‘vacant niches’/community species richness
-escape from biotic constraints
-disturbance
3.Propagule Pressure
D. Theory predicts that there will be species
extinction (based on
species-area curves)
E. Deliberate versus accidental invasions
II. Notorious Aquatic Invaders
A. Nutria (Myocastor
coypus)
1. Introduced from South
America in the 1940's; fur industry
2. Relatively large
herbivorous rodent that lives in marsh habitats.
3. Has increased marsh
loss along the tidal, emergent marsh habitats.
Everglades
C. Water Hyacinth, Eichornia
1. Pest to people in many
areas of Southern U.S., S. America, and Africa
2. Clogs waterways
3. Increases
evapotranspiration
4. Floats into littoral zone
and decomposes -- decreases oxygen, hurts fish breeding zones;
5. Blocks light penetration
D. Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum
spicatum)
1. Accidentally introduced
to North America from Europe
2. Can interfere with water
recreation.
3. Can also
crowd out important native water plants
4. Fragments clinging to
boats and trailers can spread the plant from lake to lake.
E. Hydrilla (Hydrilla verticillata)
F. Purple
loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria),
1. Native of Eurasia first
introduced into the northeastern U.S. and Canada in the early 1800's
for
ornamental and medicinal uses
2. Subsequently spread
W and S through most of temperate North America.
3. Crowds out native
wetlands and vegetation, forming extensive monospecific stands; affects
some federally
endangered orchids, and reduces habitat for waterfowl.
4. Alters flow
A. Fish
1. Nile perch (Lates nilatica)
- effects on native cichlid fish
2. 1991 study -- 44
species of fish in
the US were endangered by the introduction of non-native fishes.
3. Of the 40 fish species
that have gone extinct since 1890, 27 were negatively affected by the
introduction of non-native
fishes [Wilcove and Bean 1994])
B. Mysis in
Flathead Lake (Spencer et al.
1991)
IV. Invasions in the Laurentian Great Lakes
A. Importance of the Great Lakes
20% of the freshwater in the
world
important fishery,
historically a commercial fishery, now more important sport fishery
lots of shipping
B. Historically many intentional fish introductions
C. Unintentional introductions -- Spread via canals
and shipping
example – Sea Lamprey, Petromyzon marinus
1. First found in Lake
Ontario in 1835, and then spread after the extension of shipping
channels to the other
Great Lakes
2. Parasite that attaches to
deepwater fish, especially lake trout and
chubs.
3. Lake trout, burbot and
whitefish populations were devastated by lamprey predation by the early
1940s.
4. Today the lampreys are
less abundant in the Great Lakes, but this is only due to expensive
continued control
D. Unintentional transport by ballast water
1. European ruffe
Are we turning the Great Lake into the Caspian
Sea?
1. Zebra mussel Dreissena
polymorpha
a.
Filter much of the algae out of the lake, leaving less food for
zooplankton, and potentially for fish
b.
Clear the water by reducing phytoplankton abundance, and transfer
energy to the benthos
c.
Have harmed many native clams and crustaceans by settling on them and
covering them
d.
Large cleanup costs at water intakes for industry and drinking water
2. Goby, Neogobius
melanostomus,
a.
Presumably introduced via ballast water
b.
Spread to lakes Erie, Michigan and Superior and to many rivers
including the Mississippi watershed.
c.
This fish is an aggressive, voracious feeder and takes over spawning
sites used by native species.
3. Spiny waterflea, Bythotrephes
cederstroemi
a.
Not much known in its native habitat
b.
Like Mysis, but unlike most invertebrate predators, it eats
large zooplankton; responsible for local extinction of two
daphnids in Lake Michigan
c.
Voracious
d.
Competes with juvenile fish
e.
Tailspine protects it from predation by small fish
f.
Less energy going up the food web because it is more inefficient than
are small fish
4. Cercopagis pengoi
-- fish hook flea
a.
Native of tropical and subtropical lakes in east Africa, east
Australia, and India was first found
in Texas in 1990
b.
Aquaculture introduction? It is suspected that Daphnia lumholzi
may have been transported with shipments of Nile perch or tilapia
c.
Very spiny
d.
Invaded many southern lakes; reached Lake Erie in 2001
7. Bacteria and viruses
a.
Ballast is dispersing human pathogens
b. Vibrio
cholerae – causes cholera – found in 93% of ships tested
V. Management of invasions
A. Economic costs
Loss in potential economic
output
Cost of combating the
invasion
Effects to human health –
disease, vectors of disease (mosquitoes that carry disease), parasites
US estimate -- $138
billion/year
Cost-benefit analysis
B. Management of Invasions
1. Preventing entry
2. Eradication
3. Maintenance control
-Chemical control – resistance, cost, health hazards for humans and
other species
-Mechanical control
-Biological control
C. What can be done?
1. Scientists
Get
better at predicting invaders and systems at risk
Document effects
2. Technology
Cheaper/quicker methods for preventing and controlling invasive species
3. Ultimately a policy
question
Publicize to make people aware of the problem
Evaluate the current human dispersal rate compared with historic rate
Determine costs/benefits of preventing/controlling invasions
VI. CONCLUSIONS
Unexpected effects of
invasions
1.
some because animal not well known
2.
some because no predators/enemies/disease in the new habitat
3.
not coevolved with new prey/ competitors
4.
propagated effects through the food web
Need for increased
predictability
Importance of overlooked
small invaders
Importance of preventing
future introductions