USGS ScienceSearch

USGS · 70202761

The effectiveness of non-native fish removal techniques in freshwater ecosystems: a systematic review

Abstract

In aquatic systems, biological invasions can result in adverse ecological effects. Management techniques available for non-native fish removal programs (including eradication and population size control) vary widely, but include chemicals, harvest regimes, physical removal, or biological control. For management agencies, deciding on what non-native fish removal program to use has been challenging because there is little reliable information about the relative effectiveness of these measures in controlling or eradicating non-native fish. We conducted a systematic review, including a critical appraisal of study validity, to assess the effectiveness of different non-native fish removal methods, and to identify the factors that influence the overall success rate of each type of method. We found 95 relevant studies, generating 158 data sets. The evidence base was dominated by poorly documented studies with inadequate experimental designs (76% of removal projects). When the management goal was non-native fish eradication, chemical treatments were relatively successful (antimycin 75%; rotenone 89%) compared to other interventions. Electrofishing and passive removal measure studies indicated successful eradication was possible (58% each respectively) but required intensive effort and multiple treatments over a number of years. Of these studies with sufficient information, electrofishing had the highest success for population size control (56% of data sets). Overall, inadequate data quality and completeness severely limited our ability to make strong conclusions about the relationships between non-native fish abundance and different methods of eradication and population control, and the factors influencing the overall success rate of each method. Our review highlights that there is considerable scope for improving our evaluations of non-native fish removal methods. It is recommended that programs should have explicitly stated objectives, better data reporting, and study designs that (when possible and appropriate) incorporate replicated and controlled investigations with rigorous, long-term quantitative monitoring. Future research on the effectiveness of non-native fish removal methods should focus on: (1) the efficacy of existing or potentially new removal measures in larger, more complex environments; (2) a broader range of removal measures in general, and (3) phenotypic characteristics of individual fish within a population that fail to be eradicated or controlled.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Trina Rytwinski, Jessica J. Taylor, Lisa A. Donaldson, J. Robert Britton, David R. Browne, Robert E. Gresswell, Mark Lintermans, Kent A. Prior, Marlow G. Pellatt, Chantal Vis, Steven J. Cooke. 2019. The effectiveness of non-native fish removal techniques in freshwater ecosystems: a systematic review. https://doi.org/10.1139/er-2018-0049

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related USGS reports

Potential for bird-based biotic indices in watershed assessments: A review of methods, applications, and suggestions for improvement

Birds are sensitive to changes in environmental conditions, and metrics such as species diversity, abundance, and guild composition that describe community-level responses to anthropogenic disturbance can be useful indicators of ecosystem condition. We reviewed published studies (56) of bird-based biotic indices developed for diverse ecosystems in 14 countries to evaluate their efficacy for bioassessments. The major categories of indices used included the index of biotic integrity (IBI; 18% of studies), the bird community index (BCI; 13%), and the index of ecological condition (IEC; 7%), with numerous specialized variants comprising the remaining 62% of studies, including indices adapted for specific ecosystems such as grasslands, wetlands, and urban areas. Index performance varied geographically, highlighting the importance of localized calibration. While few studies applied bird indices at landscape and regional scales, applications that included guild-based classification and habitat-specific metrics demonstrated potential for bird-based ecosystem monitoring and assessment. Bird communities were reliable ecological indicators at regional scales when indices incorporated locally derived disturbance and habitat gradients. This regional reliability indicates that expanding bird-based indices to watershed extents is feasible, especially given the availability of extensive resources such as citizen science bird data. There is an abundance of citizen science bird monitoring programs that potentially provide data for use in watershed-scale avian IBIs. Avian indices that combine data from multiple taxa, community-based metrics, and variables describing habitat quality can provide rigorous tools for watershed bioassessment and evidence-based conservation policy implementation.

Environmental Reviews

Future-proofing the Emergency Recovery Plan for freshwater biodiversity

Freshwater biodiversity loss is accelerating globally, but humanity can change this trajectory through actions that enable recovery. To be successful, these actions require coordination and planning at a global scale. The Emergency Recovery Plan for global freshwater biodiversity aims to reduce the risk for freshwater biodiversity loss through six priority actions: (1) accelerate implementation of environmental flows; (2) improve water quality to sustain aquatic life; (3) protect and restore critical habitats; (4) manage exploitation of freshwater species and riverine aggregates; (5) prevent and control nonnative species invasions in freshwater habitats; and (6) safeguard and restore freshwater connectivity. These actions can be implemented using future-proofing approaches that anticipate future risks (e.g., emerging pollutants, new invaders, and synergistic effects) and minimize likely stressors to make conservation of freshwater biodiversity more resilient to climate change and other global environmental challenges. While uncertainty with respect to past observations is not a new concern for freshwater biodiversity, future-proofing has the distinction of accounting for the uncertainty of future conditions that have no historical baseline. The level of uncertainty with respect to future conditions is unprecedented. Future-proofing of the Emergency Recovery Plan for freshwater biodiversity will require anticipating future changes and developing and implementing actions to address those future changes. Here, we showcase future-proofing approaches likely to be successful using local case studies and examples. Ensuring that response options within the Emergency Recovery Plan are future-proofed will provide decision makers with science-informed choices, even in the face of uncertain and potentially new future conditions. We are at an inflection point for global freshwater biodiversity loss; learning from defeats and successes can support improved actions toward a sustainable future.

Environmental Reviews