Scientific uncertainty and the assessment of risks posed by non-native freshwater fishes

The introduction of non‐indigenous plants, animals and pathogens is a pressing global environmental challenge. Although not all introduced species become established and the fraction of those that do often have little appreciable effect on their new ecosystems, many others exert significant ecological, evolutionary and economic impacts. Stimulating further debate, Gozlan [Fish and Fisheries (2008) Vol. 9, pp. 106–115] argued that the majority of intentional freshwater fish introductions associated with aquaculture (fish species providing societal benefits) have not been reported as having an ecological impact. We find little to argue with his suggestion that low risk of ecological impact coupled with high market value encourages further introductions. But do we have an adequate understanding of the ecological risks associated with fish introductions to support such decisions? Indeed, resource managers and decision makers require some scientific knowledge to support their management actions; without this information, a precautionary approach is the only sensible course of action. The precautionary approach implies that the lack of scientific certainty is reason enough for postponing intentional introduction of non‐native species to avoid potentially serious or irreversible harm to the environment. Here, we suggest that we actually know very little about ecological impacts associated with fish introductions and that it would be therefore wholly inappropriate to equate a lack of data with a conclusion of ‘no impact’. We discuss four major challenges for enhancing the assessment of risks posed by non‐native freshwater fishes in the face of scientific uncertainty and highlight research opportunities and some alternative approaches for confronting these challenges in the future.     

Alien freshwater fish species in the Balkans—Vectors and pathways of introduction

Fish introductions, particularly in areas of high biological diversity and endemism, represent a major threat for biodiversity. In the Balkan Peninsula, 60 fish species have been introduced to date, of which 36 have become naturalized in inland waters. Since the Balkans are one of the world's 35 biodiversity hot spots, this large presence of alien fish species poses a serious threat for the stability of freshwater ecosystems and the survival of the native ichthyofauna and of aquatic biodiversity in general. The motivation for the introductions, and the historical timeline, varies among the Balkan states. Despite recent attempts to implement and align legislation aimed at preventing the introduction of potentially invasive species, and the implementation of rigorous controls of introductions and increased protection of open waters, the majority of current introductions remain intentional, primarily via aquaculture. This review article provides a historical overview of freshwater fish introductions, the motivation behind them and the current distribution of alien freshwater fishes in the Balkans. The ecological implications and future perspectives concerning alien fish species in the region are also discussed.     

Revisiting ecological integrity 30 years later: non‐native species and the misdiagnosis of freshwater ecosystem health

Assessing the ecological integrity of freshwater ecosystems has become a priority to protect the threatened biodiversity they hold and secure future accessibility to the services they provide. Some of the most widespread applications of biological indicators are fish‐based indices. These have mostly mirrored the approach proposed by Karr 30 years ago (Index of Biotic Integrity; IBI), based on the comparison of observed and expected composition and structure of local fish assemblages in the absence of major perturbations, using the so‐called reference condition approach. Despite the notable success of the implementation of fish‐based indices, most of them overlook non‐native species as a source of ecosystem degradation, and evaluations are focused on the physico‐chemical condition of freshwater ecosystems and their effects on freshwater biodiversity. Almost 90% of 83 reviewed IBIs did not consider non‐native species when defining reference conditions. Most IBIs used non‐native species in conjunction with native ones to construct the metrics that conform to the index. The response of the IBI to the effect of non‐native species has hardly ever been tested. When developing and evaluating IBIs, attention was mostly directed to ensuring the correct response of the index to physico‐chemical parameters, which could otherwise be characterized more effectively using alternative methods. Current application of IBIs entails a misuse of biological indicators by overlooking some types of degradation that cannot be otherwise evaluated by traditional methods. This constrains the capacity to adequately respond to one of the most challenging and common threats to the conservation of freshwater fish diversity.     

Exotic species,fisheries and conservation of freshwater biodiversity in tropical Asia: the case of the Sepik River,Papua New Guinea

1. Development of effective conservation strategies for freshwater biodiversity must take account of the trade‐off between species preservation and human use of ecosystem goods and services. The latter cannot be prevented, and attempts to manage ecosystems that focus solely on maximizing biodiversity will fail. 2. A compromise position of management for ecosystem functioning and human livelihoods — rather than preservation of every species — will provide a better basis for biodiversity conservation. This has implications for the management of exotic species. 3. There are some situations, in lentic habitats in Sri Lanka, for example, where the establishment of exotics has increased fishery yields without apparent detriment to native biodiversity. The Sepik River in Papua New Guinea provides another illustration of potential compromises between human livelihoods and biodiversity conservation. 4. The Sepik supports a relatively unproductive fishery. Two fish stocking projects (in 1987–93 and 1993–97), representing a partnership between the Papua New Guinea Government and the United Nations (UNDP/FAO), led to the introduction of a suite of exotic fish into the Sepik. Species were selected on the basis of their potential to occupy niches not filled by native fish. Unfortunately, the outcomes of these introductions are poorly documented, although there is preliminary evidence both of increased human use of exotic fish as well as declines of some native species associated with the spread of exotics. 5. Better understanding of the results of the Sepik fish introductions is important, because the pressures of burgeoning human populations in most of tropical Asia make it impossible to preserve near‐pristine environments such as the Sepik. While attempts to conserve natural or near‐natural systems must remain a priority, there is a need to develop strategies for the management of damaged or degraded ecosystems, which may contain exotics, with the aim of maintaining ecosystem functioning and, if possible, maximizing the persistence of native biodiversity. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Risk screening of non‐native,translocated and traded aquarium freshwater fishes in Greece using Fish Invasiveness Screening Kit

The invasion of non‐indigenous freshwater fish species is one of the most important threats to aquatic biodiversity. Similar to other Mediterranean countries, Greece is considered a hot spot for freshwater biodiversity, with many range‐restricted endemics of high conservation concern. The aim of this study was to undertake a risk screening assessment to evaluate the invasive potential of non‐native, translocated and traded aquarium fishes in Greece by applying the Fish Invasiveness Screening Kit (FISK). In total, 73 freshwater fish species were evaluated by two assessors. FISK was able to discriminate reliably between invasive and non‐invasive species with a threshold of 15.25. Based on mean scores, 30 species were classified as ‘high risk’, of which 17 as ‘moderately high risk’, six as ‘high risk’ and seven as ‘very high risk’. There was a high coincidence rate for the species categorisation between the two assessors, but significant differences in certainty. The results suggest that FISK is a useful tool for assessing risks posed by non‐native, translocated and traded aquarium fish species in Greece.     

Managing non‐native fish in the environment

Non‐native fishes are frequently used to enhance aquaculture and fisheries; if introduced into the wider environment, then the majority will have negligible effects on native biodiversity. However, a minority will become invasive, causing adverse ecological effects, and so management actions may be needed to minimize their dispersal and impacts. These actions include eradication attempts from specific waters or well‐defined spatial areas, population control by suppression (e.g. through removal programmes) and containment of existing populations to prevent their further spread. These remedial actions have generally only been undertaken across large spatial areas in developed countries; experience suggests a fundamental constraint is a lack of selective removal methods that target the non‐native fish species only. For example, eradication methods tend to be limited to low technology, ‘scorched‐earth’ techniques (e.g. biocide chemicals) whose use is generally constrained to relatively small and enclosed water bodies. Risk management of non‐native fishes should ensure that actions taken are commensurate with the level of risk posed by that species in the environment; although pre‐introduction risk assessment schemes have been developed, there remains a lack of decision support tools for post‐introduction situations. Although this inhibits the management of non‐native fishes in the environment, control programmes such as those against common carp Cyprinus carpio in Australia and topmouth gudgeon Pseudorasbora parva in England and Wales suggest there is potential for invasions to be managed and controlled within large spatial areas, even if their eradication may not be feasible.     

Neotropical freshwater fishes imperilled by unsustainable policies

Neotropical freshwater fishes are the most diverse on the planet (>5,500 species), although nations in Latin America have been negligent regarding their conservation. National policies have historically encouraged unsustainable practices, and recent decades have witnessed a sharp increase in harmful activities. Our aim with this review was to expose this situation and illustrate how national policies constitute the main threat to freshwater fish biodiversity. We explain that the most devastating, pervasive and systemic threats are rooted in official policies, particularly unsustainable activities (e.g. hydropower, water diversion, mining, aquaculture, agriculture and fishing), poor management/conservation (e.g. fish stocking and passages) and harmful legislation (e.g. poor licensing, non‐native species). We provide a broad portrait of the Neotropical scenario, where unsustainable policies have caused considerable damage to freshwater ecosystems, and focus on major examples from Brazil, where development projects have caused large‐scale losses to fish biodiversity. Such modus operandi of human development is incompatible with the persistence of biodiversity, and no simple solution is available to correct or minimize its effects. The current situation demands a profound behavioural shift towards better practices and policies, or these multiple high‐impact activities will continue eroding freshwater fish biodiversity and impairing essential ecosystem services.     

Freshwater ecosystem vulnerability: Is native climatic niche good enough to predict invasion events?

1. The introduction of invasive species is a significant threat to freshwater ecosystems and is changing the biogeographic patterns of fish species, leading to homogenization of fish fauna. The ability to predict potential invasions is critical in conservation biology to avoid further biodiversity loss.
2. Ecological niche modelling has become an important tool in biological invasion studies. However, some introduced species can spread to habitats that are different from those in their native range.
3. A framework based on niche shifts and ecological niche models was used to show that Pterygoplichthys ambrosettii, an armoured catfish, commonly known as ‘pleco', and native to the middle‐lower Paraná river, has expanded its niche by 27% and is now occupying a new range of environmental conditions.
4. This species has experienced a niche shift from its original habitat and has started to occupy new areas of the Upper Paraná river basin and the São Francisco basin in Brazil. Models built using both native and non‐native areas were not able to predict the invaded habitats, and in either the native or non‐native areas the cross‐validation procedures corroborate the niche expansion hypothesis.

     

The demography of introduction pathways,propagule pressure and occurrences of non‐native freshwater fish in England

• 1. Biological invasion theory predicts that the introduction and establishment of non‐native species is positively correlated with propagule pressure. Releases of pet and aquarium fishes to inland waters has a long history; however, few studies have examined the demographic basis of their importation and incidence in the wild.
• 2. For the 1500 grid squares (10×10 km) that make up England, data on human demographics (population density, numbers of pet shops, garden centres and fish farms), the numbers of non‐native freshwater fishes (from consented licences) imported in those grid squares (i.e. propagule pressure), and the reported incidences (in a national database) of non‐native fishes in the wild were used to examine spatial relationships between the occurrence of non‐native fishes and the demographic factors associated with propagule pressure, as well as to test whether the demographic factors are statistically reliable predictors of the incidence of non‐native fishes, and as such surrogate estimators of propagule pressure.
• 3. Principal coordinates of neighbour matrices analyses, used to generate spatially explicit models, and confirmatory factor analysis revealed that spatial distributions of non‐native species in England were significantly related to human population density, garden centre density and fish farm density. Human population density and the number of fish imports were identified as the best predictors of propagule pressure.
• 4. Human population density is an effective surrogate estimator of non‐native fish propagule pressure and can be used to predict likely areas of non‐native fish introductions. In conjunction with fish movements, where available, human population densities can be used to support biological invasion monitoring programmes across Europe (and perhaps globally) and to inform management decisions as regards the prioritization of areas for the control of non‐native fish introductions.

© Crown copyright 2010. Reproduced with the permission of her Majesty's Stationery Office. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Fish hosts of the freshwater mussel Unio foucauldianus Pallary, 1936

1. The life cycle of Unio foucauldianus Pallary, 1936, a critically endangered freshwater mussel species (Bivalvia: Unionida), includes a parasitic phase using fish as hosts. Therefore, to develop more efficient conservation strategies it is essential to know which are the suitable fish hosts of U. foucauldianus.
2. In this study, two approaches were used to assess the fish hosts of U. foucauldianus: the determination of infestation rates of fishes under natural conditions through monthly sampling (from January to June) in the Laabid River (Oum Rbia basin) and the N'Fis River (Tensift basin), and artificial infestation in laboratory trials using fish species from both rivers.
3. The natural infestation of fish was detected from February to June, with a peak in May. Fully metamorphosed juveniles were only detected in native fish species, i.e. Luciobarbus ksibi (Boulenger, 1905), Carasobarbus fritschii (Günther, 1874), Luciobarbus zayanensis Doadrio, Casal‐lopez & Yahyaoui, 2016, Labeobarbus maroccanus (Günther, 1874), and Luciobarbus magniatlantis (Pellegrin, 1919). The two non‐native fish species used do not function as effective hosts.
4. Given the increasing human pressure on native fish species in the Mediterranean biodiversity hotspot, including the increased number of non‐native fish introductions, urgent conservation measures are discussed for this and other freshwater mussel species.