Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017;79(1):113-125.
doi: 10.1007/s00027-016-0483-2. Epub 2016 Apr 22.

Invasive crayfish impacts on native fish diet and growth vary with fish life stage

Affiliations

Invasive crayfish impacts on native fish diet and growth vary with fish life stage

Kevin A Wood et al. Aquat Sci. 2017.

Abstract

Assessing the impacts of invasive organisms is a major challenge in ecology. Some widespread invasive species such as crayfish are potential competitors and reciprocal predators of ecologically and recreationally important native fish species. Here, we examine the effects of signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) on the growth, diet, and trophic position of the chub (Squalius cephalus) in four rivers in Britain. Growth rates of 0+ chub were typically lower in sympatric populations with signal crayfish compared with allopatric populations, and this effect could be traced through to 2+ chub in one river. However, growth rates of older chub (5+ to 6+) were typically higher in the presence of crayfish. Sympatry with crayfish resulted in lower chub length-at-age and mass-at-age in half of the rivers sampled, with no change detected in the other rivers. Stable isotope analyses (δ13C and δ15N) revealed that both chub and crayfish were omnivorous, feeding at multiple trophic levels and occupying similar trophic positions. We found some evidence that chub trophic position was greater at invaded sites on one river, with no difference detected on a second river. Mixing models suggested crayfish were important food items for both small and large chub at invaded sites. This study provides evidence that invasive species can have both positive and negative effects on different life stages of a native species, with the net impact likely to depend on responses at the population level.

Keywords: Chub Squalius cephalus; Competition; Diet shift; Invasive species; Scalimetry; Signal crayfish Pacifastacus leniusculus; Stable isotopes.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
A comparison of calculated mean (±SE) yearly growth rates of chub sampled from uninvaded (closed symbols) and invaded (open symbols) sites on a the Rother, b Chad Brook, c the Cherwell, and d the Evenlode
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Chub fork length-at-age at uninvaded (solid circles and line) and invaded (open circles and dashed line) sites on a the Rother, b Chad Brook, c the Cherwell, and d the Evenlode. Chub mass-at-age at uninvaded (solid circles and line) and invaded (open circles and dashed line) sites on e the Rother and f Chad Brook
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Baseline corrected chub δ15N as a function of fork length for uninvaded (solid circles) and invaded (open circles) sites on a the Rother and b Chad Brook
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Isotope bi-plots indicating the mean (±standard error) for chub, crayfish, and the putative prey of both species, for a the Rother and b Chad Brook. For the Rother small fish were 1+ cyprinids, Phoxinus phoxinus, Cottus gobio, and Barbatula barbatula, aquatic invertebrates were Trichoptera, Gammarids, and Ephemeroptera, and terrestrial invertebrates were Formicidae, Arachnidae, Hemiptera, Diptera, and Coleoptera. For Chad Brook small fish were Phoxinus phoxinus, Cottus gobio, Barbatula barbatula, and Gasterosteus aculeatus, aquatic invertebrates were Gammarids, Calopteryx sp., Heteroptera, Limnaea, and Trichoptera, and terrestrial invertebrates Formicidae, Arachnidae, Diptera, Coleoptera, and Gastropoda
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
The mean (±95 % CI) percentage of small and large chub diets comprised by each food source at uninvaded and invaded sites, as indicated by the SIAR mixing model. Normal distributions of isotope data were confirmed by visual inspection of the data

References

    1. Allouche S, Gaudin P. Effects of avian predation threat, water flow and cover on growth and habitat use by chub, Leuciscus cephalus, in an experimental stream. Oikos. 2001;94:481–492. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0706.2001.940310.x. - DOI
    1. Bašić T, Britton JR, Jackson MC, Reading P, Grey J. Angling baits and invasive crayfish as important trophic subsidies for a large cyprinid fish. Aquat Sci. 2015;77:153–160. doi: 10.1007/s00027-014-0370-7. - DOI
    1. Blake MA, Hart PJB. The vulnerability of juvenile signal crayfish to perch and eel predation. Freshw Biol. 1995;33:233–244. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2427.1995.tb01164.x. - DOI
    1. Bolland J, Britton JR, Cowx IG. Lifetime consequences of variable 0 year group length in riverine populations of chub Leuciscus cephalus (L.) J Fish Biol. 2007;71:1810–1819. doi: 10.1111/j.1095-8649.2007.01650.x. - DOI
    1. Bondar CA, Bottriell K, Zeron K, Richardson JS. Does trophic position of the omnivorous signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) in a stream food web vary with life history stage or density? Can J Fish Aquat Sci. 2005;62:2632–2639. doi: 10.1139/f05-167. - DOI

LinkOut - more resources