4.4 Article

Modeling the potential for managing invasive common carp in temperate lakes by targeting their winter aggregations

期刊

BIOLOGICAL INVASIONS
卷 18, 期 3, 页码 831-839

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10530-016-1054-0

关键词

Cyprinus carpio; Winter seining; Judas technique; Telemetry; Removal

资金

  1. Riley Purgatory Bluff Creek Watershed District, Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund
  2. Conservation Biology Graduate Program at the University of Minnesota

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Common carp (Cyprinus carpio) is one of world's most invasive fish and managers have long searched for practical control strategies for this species. In temperate systems, common carp forms large winter aggregations that can be located with telemetry and removed with seine nets. This has been viewed as an excellent management possibility, but its success has been mixed. Using a modeling approach, we demonstrate that the usefulness of winter seining in controlling common carp in temperate North American lakes depends on whether carp populations are driven by one of two distinct recruitment dynamics. In lakes where carp can easily recruit within systems from which they are being removed, such as within productive lakes with poor communities of micropredators, winter seining is unlikely to be effective. Even very high removal rates (90 % adults annually) were not sufficient to reach management goal (biomass < 100 kg/ha) in such systems. However, in regions with strong predatory communities where carp can recruit only in outlying, seasonally unstable marshes, removal rates as low as 30 % annually or 50 % every other year were able to reduce carp biomass below the management threshold. Such removal rates are achievable as they fall within the range of empirically measured values. Because many carp populations are driven by external recruitment dynamics, strategically conducted winter removal could be used to control this species in a large number of systems across temperate North America and elsewhere.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据