Compendium of Research on Aquatic Invasive Species in Ontairo

Home , Bythotrephes longimanus, Cercopagis pengoi

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305507355

Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario

Technical Report · January 2014

CITATIONS READS 0 18

3 authors, including:

Ana Carolina Taraborelli Tim Johnson Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry 8 PUBLICATIONS 183 CITATIONS 119 PUBLICATIONS 3,034 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The ecological role of the round goby, Neogobius melanostomus (Pallas, 1814) in the Bay of Quinte, Lake Ontario. View project

Tag Burden in Juvenile Salmonids View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Tim Johnson on 24 December 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file. Aquatic Research and Monitoring Section Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry

Aquatic Research Series 2014-04 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario

Carolina Taraborelli, Brittany Yuill, and Tim Johnson

Aquatic Research and Monitoring Section Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry

Aquatic Research Series 2014-04 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario

Carolina Taraborelli, Brittany Yuill, and Tim Johnson

Aquatic Research and Monitoring Section Science and Research Branch Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry 41 Hatchery Lane Picton ON K0K 2T0 July 2014

Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario

ISBN 978-1-4606-4104-0

This publication was produced by:

Aquatic Research and Monitoring Section Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry 2140 East Bank Drive Peterborough ON K9J 7B8 [email protected]

Online link to report can be found at: Ontario.ca/aquaticresearch

This document is for scientific research purposes and does not represent the policy or opinion of the Government of Ontario.

This technical report should be cited as follows: Taraborelli, Carolina, Brittany Yuill, and Tim Johnson. 2014. Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario. Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry. 20p.

Cover photo: Cladophora algae mats covering extensive reaches of the eastern Lake Erie shoreline Photo credit: Scott Higgins

Cette publication hautement spécialisée Compendium de recherches sur les espèces aquatiques envahissantes en Ontario n'est disponible qu'en anglais conformément au Règlement 671/92, sel- on lequel il n’est pas obligatoire de la traduire en vertu de la Loi sur les services en français. Pour obtenir des renseignements en français, veuillez communiquer avec le ministère des Richesses naturelles et des Forêts au [email protected]. Abstract This compendium of research projects on aquatic invasive species (AIS) in Ontario identifies and describes current research as well as gaps in knowledge, taxa, and/or geographic coverage. The compendium includes interviews with government, academic, industry, and private researchers studying AIS in Ontario, U.S. researchers working on AIS in bordering jurisdictions, and published research based in Ontario between 1990 and 2012. One hundred and seventy six (176) current research projects are occurring in 14 of the province’s 20 Fishery Management Zones (FMZ), studying 22 individual species. Over 49% of the research is focussed on invasive invertebrate species (e.g., Bythotrephes and dreissenid mussels), with another 32% concentrating on invasive fish (e.g. round goby and sea lamprey). Geographically, 72% of research is occurring in the Great Lakes, followed by inland FMZs in southern Ontario (17%). Forty percent of the research is categorized as impacts and adaptation while only 3% focussed on policy development; the remainder was evenly distributed among risk asssessment, early detection, dispersal, and control tools. The literature review included 338 journal articles showing an exponentially increasing trend in number of publications over the past 20 years. Of the 133 articles published in the past three years (2010–2012), 18% dealt with Bythotrephes, 17% with dreissenids, 16% with round goby, and 10% with the bloody red shrimp (Hemimysis). In the previous decade (2000–2009), most articles focussed on dreissenids (20%), round goby (16%), and sea lamprey (10%), while the 1990s showed a clear focus on dreissenids (59%), with less emphasis on round goby (11%) and Bythotrephes (6%). Consistent with the interview results, the vast majority of the published research occurred in the Great Lakes (81%), followed by southern FMZs (13%). More research is occurring in the northern regions now (10%) relative to what has been published in the past 20 years (1%). Overall, our results show a large number of research projects on AIS are currently underway in Ontario, that the bulk of that research occurs in the Great Lakes, and that impacts of the usual suspects (i.e., dreissenids, Bythotrephes, round goby) continue to dominate. Recently, research has expanded to include more and new taxa, more research in the north, and new disciplines such as risk assessment and early detection suggesting a shift to more proactive rather than reactive science needs.

Résumé Ce compendium des projets de recherche sur des espèces aquatiques envahissantes (EAE) en Ontario identifie et décrit les recherches actuelles ainsi que les lacunes dans les connaissances, les taxa et/ou la couverture géographique. Le compendium comprend des entrevues avec des chercheurs du gouvernement, des universités, de l’industrie et du secteur privé étudiant les EAE en Ontario, des chercheurs américains travaillant sur les EAE dans des États voisins, et des recherches effectuées en Ontario ayant fait l’objet d’un rapport entre 1990 et 2012. Cent soixante-seize (176) projets de recherche actuels sont actuellement en cours dans 14 des 20 zones de gestion des pêches (ZGP), étudiant 22 espèces différentes. Plus de 49 % des recherches portent sur des espèces invertébrées envahissantes (p. ex., Bythotrephes et les moules de la famille des dreissenidées), tandis que 32% se concentrent sur des poissons envahissants (p. ex., le gobie à taches noires et la lamproie). Sur le plan géographique, 72% des recherches se déroulent dans les Grands Lacs, que suivent les ZGP intérieures du sud de l’Ontario (17%). Quarante pour cent des recherches sont catégorisées parmi les incidences et adaptations , alors que seulement 3% portaient sur l’ élaboration de politiques ; le reste était également réparti entre l’ évaluation des risques , la détection précoce , l’ expansion et les outils de contrôle . La recension des écrits a porté sur 338 articles de journaux témoignant d’une augmentation exponentielle du nombre de publications au cours des 20 dernières années. Sur les 133 articles publiés au cours des trois dernières années (2010-2012), 18 % portaient sur Bythotrephes, 17 % sur les dreissenidées, 16 % sur le gobie à taches noires et 10 % sur le mysidacé tacheté (Hemimysis). Au cours des dix années précédentes (2000-2009), la plupart des articles s’intéressaient aux dreissenidées (20 %), au gobie à taches noires (16 %) et à la lamproie (10 %), alors que les années 1990 ont vu un intérêt très net pour les dresseinidées (59 %), mais plus mitigé pour le gobie à taches noires (11 %) et Bythotrephes (6 %). Conformément aux résultats des entrevues, la grande majorité des recherches publiées ont eu lieu dans les Grands Lacs (81 %), suivis des ZGP méridionales (13 %). Davantage de recherches sont actuellement réalisées dans les régions du Nord (10 %) par rapport à ce qui a été publié au cours des 20 dernières années (1 %). Dans l’ensemble, nos résultats montrent qu’un grand nombre de projets de recherche sur les EAE sont actuellement en cours en Ontario, que le gros de ces recherches se déroulent i Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario dans les Grands Lacs, et que les incidences des suspects habituels (c’est-à-dire les dreissenidées, Bythotrephes, le gobie à taches noires) continuent de dominer. Récemment, les recherches se sont enrichies pour inclure des taxa nouveaux, davantage de recherches dans le Nord, et de nouvelles disciplines telles que l’ évaluation des risques et la détection précoce , ce qui donne à penser qu’on se tourne vers une science davantage proactive que réactive.

Acknowledgements We are grateful to Jeff Brinsmead (OMNRF Biodiversity Section) for providing guidance during the initial stages of this project and for critical review of the resulting report. Funding for this work was provided by the Ontario Invasive Species Centre. Thanks to Lyn Thompson for assistance with the format of the final report. This compendium would not have been possible without the support of the many researchers and other individuals who responded to our survey.

ii Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario Contents Abstract...... i Résumé...... i Acknowledgements...... ii List of tables...... iii List of figures...... iii Introduction...... 1 Data collection...... 1 Results...... 3 Response rate ...... 3 Interviews and surveys...... 3 Review of conference abstracts ...... 3 Analysis...... 3 Literature review...... 7 Overall survey findings...... 10 Future recommendations...... 11 References...... 12 Appendix A ...... 14 Appendix B ...... 15 Appendix C...... 16 Appendix D...... 17

List of tables Table 1: Research type definitions used to classify AIS research projects and published articles...... 1 Table 2: Geographic distribution of AIS research by taxonomic group based on Ontario’s fisheries management zone classification...... 5 Table 3: Number of AIS research projects occurring in the Great Lakes (except Lake Michigan) by Ontario and U.S. research groups...... 6 Table 4: Number of published journal articles addressing specific species, taxonomic groups or ballast water/sediment research in Ontario, by decade of publication...... 8 Table 5: Geographic distribution of AIS research articles by taxonomic group based on Ontario’s Fishery Management Zones...... 9

List of figures Figure 1: Number of research projects addressing aquatic invasive species in Ontario by organization...... 4 Figure 2: Number of research projects occurring in Ontario by taxa...... 4 Figure 3: Type of research occurring in Ontario based on telephone interviews, email surveys, and review of conference abstracts...... 5 Figure 4. Comparison of the type of research led by Ontario vs U.S. researchers in the Great Lakes only...... 7 Figure 5: Number of published journal articles addressing AIS research in Ontario, 1990 to 2012...... 7 Figure 6: Type of research occurring in Ontario based journal articles published between 1990 and 2012...... 9 Figure 7: Percentage of journal articles published by research type addressing AIS in Ontario between 1990 and 2012...... 10 iii Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario

Introduction The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (OMNRF) has sought to develop a compendium summarizing research projects on aquatic invasive species in Ontario. The purpose of the compendium is to identify and describe research, and through the process, identify gaps in knowledge, taxa and/or geography related to aquatic invasive species (AIS) in Ontario. The compendium will be used to focus future research on AIS in Ontario. For the purpose of this report, AIS are defined as harmful aquatic alien species whose introduction or spread threatens the environment, the economy, or society, including human health. Alien species are plants, animals, and micro-organisms introduced by human action outside their natural past or present distribution. We define research in the broadest sense of the word to include any gathering of data, information and facts for the advancement of knowledge. The compendium was developed by gathering information from current researchers in Ontario, as well as through a literature review over the past two decades (1990–2012). The literature review provides a “historic” context to compare with current research aiming to identify any possible shifts and changes in taxa, geographic scope or topics pertinent to AIS. The compendium only aims to highlight projects that are research based (i.e., the systematic investigation of AIS including factors affecting their ability to colonize new habitats and impacts once established). The compendium does not include projects whose primary purpose was the detection, monitoring, assessment, control, or eradication of AIS. Overall the compendium aims to serve as a resource on aquatic invasive species highlighting researchers and organizations conducting research on AIS, current invasive species of concern, and the type of research conducted (Table 1).

Table 1: Research type definitions used to classify AIS research projects and published articles.

Type of research Definition Risk assessment Investigates the probability of an AIS arriving and establishing in a new environment. Includes literature research and mathematical models that look at environmental suitability and predict invasion probability. Early detection Refers to first detection of AIS in a new environment, description of its biology, ecology and distribution, and comparison with that of its native range. Includes research tools that can help identifying the presence of an AIS in new environments (e.g., eDNA). Dispersal Studies secondary invasions; the species is invading new areas that are adjacent, near or connected by vectors to the original invasion site. This type of research can include mathematical models to predict dispersion and the study of vectors that act in the transfer of AIS (e.g., boat traffic). Control tools Refers to the process of developing a product or protocol that may ultimately see application as a control tool in an aquatic system. Impacts and Investigates direct or indirect effects that AIS may have on native species, the environment, other adaptation established AIS, the general public, and the economy. Also includes the study of AIS characteristics that are different from that of the species in its native range. Policy Studies often based on literature reviews and expert consultation that establish or modify regulations development or management actions to address any of the above research topics.

Data collection Initial work on the compendium occurred in February and March 2012 and was completed between November 2012 and February 2013. The first task was to identify survey attributes that would form the basis of the relational database (MS Access) and subsequent interviews and literature search. This list was used to develop a survey questionnaire (Appendix A). To ensure the appropriate level of detail and clarity was captured for each survey question, telephone interviews of researchers who had agreed to take part in the project was chosen as the method for data collection. Potential interviewees were chosen by identifying candidate organizations from government, academia, conservation authorities, and private organizations (e.g., environmental consultants). Past knowledge

1 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario of active researchers, reviews of staff/faculty web pages, and recent activity identified through a literature review identified specific individuals to be contacted. Through the course of the interviews, additional research contacts were identified through research collaborations/networks. Only researchers or persons with seniority in their organization were contacted to optimise capturing major research activities (i.e., academic professors as opposed to graduate students). Individuals were contacted via email with a brief description of the project and a request for a time to schedule an interview to talk about current research projects. The compendium has a provincial focus, so government researchers and academics were contacted first. All Canadian contacts were from Ontario with the exception of a few who were based in Manitoba or Quebec but had research projects occurring in Ontario. AIS are a major issue in the Great Lakes and therefore U.S. researchers were contacted in a second wave, using email exclusively with a request to complete an attached questionnaire. An additional approach to incorporate recent AIS research in Ontario involved searching conference abstracts for the past three years from major aquatic conferences that occurred in Ontario, and/or those that typically included sessions on aquatic invasive species and were well attended by delegates from Ontario (Canadian Conference for Fisheries Research [CCFFR], International Association for Great Lakes Research [IAGLR], International Conference on Aquatic Invasive Species [ICAIS] and Ecological and Evolutionary Ethology of Fishes [EEEF]). The conference abstract search was focussed on identifying U.S. researchers, although some new Ontario researchers were identified and added to the list. A full list of Ontario and U.S. researchers is provided in Appendix D (Tables D.1 to D.5). The literature review was used to place the interview results in a longer-term context. The review used two complementary approaches to compile information on AIS focussed research that occurred in Ontario. During the initial 2012 phase of the project, multiple online search engines were used to scan peer reviewed journals that focussed on AIS affecting Ontario. The key journals searched were Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Science, Journal of Great Lakes Research, and Biological Invasions. These journals were selected because they tend to concentrate on articles with a geographic focus of the Great Lakes and Ontario relative to other journals, or on AIS. Searches were conducted using Boolean terms “invas*” and “invad*” to capture topics such as invasion, invasive, invade, invader, etc., as well as species names, while constraining geographic location to Ontario and the Great Lakes. During the second phase of the project, Web of Science and Scopus search engines were used to identify relevant articles from a wide range of biological and environmental science journals. A broader set of search terms were used (e.g., invasive, exotic, alien, introduced, non-native, lake, river, and stream) while constraining the geographic scope to Ontario using author affiliation. Abstracts from both approaches were skim read and relevant articles were appended to the database. Owing to lags between undertaking of research and publication (often 2–3 years), we used the most recent three years (2010 to present) to identify “current” research on AIS. Current results were compared with patterns for “recent” (2000–2009) and “past” (1990–1999) decades to identify trends in research type or focus. The literature review was conducted between interviews and serves not as a complete resource, but as an overview of past research projects. Projects identified in the literature review included U.S. based studies as long as the U.S. studies were focussed on the Great Lakes (excluding Lake Michigan). No effort was made to capture grey literature (research completion reports, agency reports, unpublished reports) in the literature review. Data collected from both the literature review and the interviews were compiled into a Microsoft Access database. The database consists of four key tables and related data entry forms: contacts, communications, information from interviews, and information from the literature review. The contact table holds all contact information from interviewees, including email, phone numbers, affiliated institution, and address. A tracking system of individuals contacted, interviewed or response to the survey was recorded in the communications table. The interview table houses all information gathered from the interview, with each project mentioned by the interviewee housed as a separate record. The literature review table contains a full citation and in some cases an abstract for each paper deemed relevant to the survey objective. All data from both data streams (interview and literature) was coded by organism name, organism type (plant, invertebrate, fish, seabird), research type (risk assessment, early detection, dispersal, control tools, impact/ adaptation, policy), and geographic zone (Ontario’s Fisheries Management Zones [FMZ], Appendix B). However, the compendium does not include projects whose sole purpose is control of an existing AIS. In addition, with the focus exclusively on research, the compendium does not capture information on assessment or monitoring (i.e., range, abundance, demographics), nor to document management actions such as control, and policy implementation.

2 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario However, monitoring projects that were raised by interviewees were appended to the interview database table although not included in the analyses.

Results

Response rate A total of 129 individuals (84 from Ontario, 45 from U.S.) from 47 different organizations (28 Canadian, 19 from U.S.) were initially identified and added to the research database (Appendix D, Tables D.1 to D.4). Of these individuals, some were considered “leading contacts” who may not be conducting research directly but were potentially involved with research as program administrators or would have knowledge of who was conducting research within their organization. Other contacts were known to work in the field of AIS, but their potential participation in research (as opposed to monitoring, control, policy, etc.) needed to be verified. In the end, 84 individuals from Ontario and 45 individuals from the U.S. were contacted, with a response rate of 86% in Ontario and 27% in the U.S. (Tables D.1, D.3 and D.4). Unfortunately due to the low U.S. response rate, we have less confidence in any patterns in U.S. based research that affects Ontario’s jurisdiction. Of the 36 Ontario contacts that were not conducting AIS research in Ontario, 36% were conducting monitoring of AIS in Ontario, 5.5% were conducting research on AIS but not in Ontario, 28% were not currently working on AIS, 5.5% responded that nobody in their organization was conducting research in AIS, 14% were “leading contacts”, and 11% were retired or were no longer working for that organization (Table D.2). Only three of the 13 U.S. individuals that replied to our email survey were conducting AIS research affecting Ontario (more specifically their research occurred in the Great Lakes, excluding Lake Michigan) (Tables D.3 and D.4). From the nine U.S. individuals that were not conducting research in AIS in Ontario, 33.3% were working on AIS research but in either Lake Michigan or New York inland lakes, 33.3% were not working on AIS, and 33.3% were retired or no longer working in the respective organization (Table D.4).

Interviews and surveys The interviews identified 62 different research projects by 36 research groups at 17 different organizations. Due to the complexity and multiple partnerships of research collaborations, in some cases multiple researchers were working on the same project. The project inventory contains only unique projects even when multiple researchers contacted were working on the same project. However, if two researchers were working on different aspects of a larger project that was supported under the same grant (i.e., a field vs lab study), then these projects were listed separately.

Review of conference abstracts The conference search identified 26 additional research projects occurring in Ontario, conducted by 21 different research groups. Nineteen of these 21 new groups were new to our contact list, all of them based in the U.S. For each abstract that was identified as AIS research in Ontario, affiliation of the contributing authors was verified to identify the project lead making the results comparable with the interview process (i.e., graduate students may be lead author on the abstract, but the principle investigator on the grant was recorded in the database). U.S. researchers identified during the search of conference abstracts are listed in Appendix D, Table D.5.

Analysis All the information captured from the interviews, surveys, and conference abstracts was compiled for analysis. This resulted in 88 different AIS research projects involving 57 different research groups. Thirty-three percent of these projects were led by U.S. researchers (in the Great Lakes). Of the 67% of the projects based in Ontario, 46% were led by university researchers, 34% by provincial researchers, and 13% by federal researchers (Figure 1). Twenty-four individual taxa and five species groups are being researched in 14 of 20 FMZs in Ontario (Figure 2, Table 2). Prominent species currently being researched in Ontario include round goby (Neogobius melanostomus), zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha), spiny waterflea Bythotrephes( longimanus), quagga mussel (Dreissena bugensis) and bloody red shrimp (Hemimysis anomala) (Figure 2). 3 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario Figure 1: Number of research projects addressing aquatic invasive species in Ontario by organization. For a detailed list of U.S. organizations refer to Appendix D.

Figure 2: Number of research projects occurring in Ontario by taxa. Projects are based on telephone interviews, email surveys, and review of conference abstracts. Taxonomic codes include: All=all AIS species, SL=sea lamprey, RS=rainbow smelt, CC=common carp, AC=Asian carp, RD=rudd, RG=round goby, TG=tubenose goby, SB=smallmouth bass, Fish=AIS fish in general, BC=Bythotrephes, CP=Cercopagis, HA=Hemimysis, Zoo=zooplankton in general, ES=European snail, MB=mud Bythynia, NZ=New Zealand mud snail, ZM=zebra mussel, QM=quagga mussel, RC=rusty crayfish, Olig=oligochaete, Ben=benthic invertebrates in general, Phyto=phytoplankton, FW=fanwort, WS=water soldier, PH=Phragmites, TF=turfgrass, TY=Typha spp., WH=water hyacinth, WL=water lettuce.

Regionally, 72% of the research is occurring in the Great Lakes (FMZ 9, 13, 14, 19, 20), with an additional 3% having general provincial focus (Table 2). Of the inland FMZs (25% of the total AIS research projects), most research is occurring in southern Ontario (67%) followed by northeast (22%) and northwest (11%). No research is occurring in the Far North. Province wide, the majority of the research is categorized as “impacts and adaptation” (42%), with most of the remaining projects distributed among “risk assessment”, “early detection”, “dispersal”, and “control tools” (Figure 3).

4 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario When comparing Great Lakes AIS research led by Ontario vs U.S. research groups, several interesting patterns were revealed (Table 3). While both groups have comparable numbers of projects focussing on fish (with a clear emphasis on round goby), many more U.S. led projects are studying invertebrates (especially zebra and quagga mussels). It should be noted that because Ontario does not border Lake Michigan, we did not include any research from that lake. With the pending threat of an Asian carp invasion into the Great Lakes at Lake Michigan, there is currently an extensive amount of research focussed on control and management of Asian carp that we have not captured in the compendium (see www.Asiancarp.us or www.asiancarp.org). We did not detect any U.S. led research projects on aquatic invasive plants. Regarding the type of research conducted, Canadian projects are more evenly split among “impact and adaptation”, “control tools”, and “early detection” while U.S. projects emphasize “impacts and adaptation” (Figure 4).

Table 2: Geographic distribution of AIS research by taxonomic group based on Ontario’s Fisheries Management Zone classification (see Appendix C for zone map). Projects are based on results from telephone interviews, email surveys, and review of conference abstracts. The same project may be represented multiple times if it affects multiple FMZ’s. Ont* represents projects affecting Ontario as a whole. NAm* represents projects affecting North America.

Region FMZ All AIS taxa Fish Invertebrate Plant Virus Total Northwest 6 1 1 7 1 4 5 Northeast 10 1 4 5 11 1 5 6 12 1 1 Southern 15 8 1 9 16 1 1 8 10 17 7 3 2 12 18 1 4 5 Great Lakes 9 2 9 11 2 1 25 13 2 9 12 3 1 27 14 7 4 2 1 14 19 3 19 22 4 1 49 20 4 13 17 10 44 Ont* 1 4 1 6 NAm* 1 1 Total 13 73 106 24 4 220

Figure 3: Type of research occurring in Ontario based on telephone interviews, email surveys, and review of conference abstracts.

5 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario Table 3: Number of AIS research projects occurring in the Great Lakes (except Lake Michigan) by Ontario and U.S. research groups. Projects are based on results from telephone interviews, email surveys, and review of conference abstracts.

Common name Scientific name Ontario U.S. Total Fish All AIS fish species 1 1 Asian carp Ctenopharyngodon idella 1 3 4 Hypophthalmichtys molitrix Hypophthalmichtys nobilis Mylopharyngodon piceus Common carp Cyprinus carpio 1 1 Round goby Neogobius melanostomus 5 5 10 Rudd Scardinus erythropthalmus 1 1 Sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus 1 1 2 Tubenose goby Proterorhinus marmoratus 1 1 Total 11 13 24 Invertebrate All AIS invertebrate species 2 2 Benthic invertebrates 1 1 Bloody red shrimp Hemimysis anomala 3 2 5 European snail Valvata piscinalis 1 1 Mud bithynia Bithynia tentaculata 1 1 New Zealand mud snail Potamopyrgus antipodarum 1 1 Oligochaetes 1 1 Quagga mussel Dreissena bugensis 11 11 Rusty crayfish Orconectes rusticus 1 1 Spiny water flea Bythotrephes longimanus 1 1 2 Zebra mussel Dreissena polymorpha 1 12 13 Zooplankton 1 1 Total 9 31 40 Plant Cattails Typha ssp. 1 1 Common reed Phragmites australis 2 2 Phytoplankton 1 1 Turfgrass 1 1 Water hyancinth Eichornia crassipes 1 1 Total 6 6 Virus VHS Viral hemorhagic septicemia 1 1 All AIS taxa 1 3 4

6 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario

Figure 4. Comparison of the type of research led by Ontario vs U.S. researchers in the Great Lakes only. Projects are based on results from telephone interviews, email surveys, and review of conference abstracts.

Literature review The literature search found 338 articles published since 1990 addressing AIS research in Ontario. The number of research articles that focus on AIS in Ontario increased dramatically since the early 2000s (Figure 5). Of the 133 articles published in the past three years (2010–2012), 18% dealt with Bythotrephes, 17% with dreissenids, 16% with round goby and 10% with Hemimysis (Table 4). In the previous decade (2000–2009), most articles focussed on dreissenids (20%), round goby (16%) and sea lamprey (10%). In the 1990s the majority of research was done on dreissenids (59%) and to a lesser extent on round goby (11%) and Bythotrephes (6%).

Figure 5: Number of published journal articles addressing AIS research in Ontario, 1990 to 2012.

7 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario Table 4: Number of published journal articles addressing specific species, taxonomic groups or ballast water/sediment research in Ontario, by decade of publication, 1990 to 2012. Some articles addressed multiple species so the total (n=387) exceeds the actual number of papers (338). Common name Scientific name 1990–1999 2000–2009 2010–2012 Total Alewife Alosa pseudoharengus 2 3 1 6 All AIS fish species 4 4 Asian carp Ctenopharyngodon idella 3 4 7 Hypophthalmichthys molitrix Hipophthalmichthys nobilis Mylopharyngodon piceus Bloody red shrimp Hemimysis anomala 13 13 Bryozoa 2 2 Cladocera 2 2 Copepoda 2 1 3 Eurasian ruffe Gymnocephalus cernuus 3 5 1 9 Fanwort Cabomba caroliniana 2 2 Fishhook waterflea Cercopagis pengoi 1 15 3 19 Gammarid Echinogammarus ischnus 3 2 5 Rainbow smelt Osmerus mordax 1 8 3 12 Rotifers 2 1 3 Round goby Neogobius melanostomus 8 29 21 58 Rusty crayfish Orconectes rusticus 2 1 3 Sea lamprey Petromyzon marinus 2 18 4 24 Spiny waterflea Bythotrephes longimanus 4 13 24 41 Tubenose goby Proterorhinus marmoratus 2 2 4 Water hyacinth Eichhornia crassipes 2 2 Water lettuce Pistia stratiotes 2 2 Zebra and quagga mussels Dreissena polymorpha 43 37 22 102 Dreissena bugensis Other taxa 6 15 11 32 Ballast sediment 2 2 Ballast water 1 10 6 17 AIS in general 2 13 4 19 Total 73 181 133 387

Geographically, the vast majority of AIS research focussed on the Great Lakes (81%), with another 3% addressing provincial and 4% continental scale research (Table 5). Of the inland lakes research (8% of the total), 88% occurred in southern Ontario, 8% in the northwest, and 5% in the northeast. Again no AIS research was conducted in the Far North. However, a greater proportion of the total research is now occurring in the northern regions (9%) relative to what has been published in the previous 20 years (1%). Regarding the type of research published since 1990, the majority of the articles were focussed on impacts and adaptation (55%), followed by risk assessment (14%), dispersal (13%) and early detection (10%) (Figure 6). In the early 1990’s, the majority of published research focussed on impacts and adaptation (45%), early detection (28%), and dispersal (24%), all largely related to zebra and quagga mussels which were first identified in the Great Lakes in the late 1980s. Impacts and adaptation became more prominent through the late 1990s, while the recent (2000– 2009) decade saw the emergence of research on risk assessment and a somewhat discontinuous pattern around the development of control tools. Both risk assessment and control tools retracted slightly in the current (2010–2012) time period while impacts and adaptation research continues to dominate (Figure 7).

8 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario Table 5: Geographic distribution of AIS research articles by taxonomic group based on Ontario’s Fisheries Management Zones (Appendix C). Ont* represents projects affecting Ontario as a whole. NAm* represents projects affecting North America, SLR* represents St. Lawrence River and BW* represents ballast water. Region FMZ Aquatic Fish Invertebrate Seabird All Total Macrophyte Northwest 5 2 2 6 1 1 7 1 1 Northeast 10 1 1 2 Southern 15 2 20 1 23 16 3 9 12 17 8 2 2 12 18 1 4 5 Great Lakes 9 11 46 41 2 100 13 11 37 47 2 97 14 11 35 37 3 86 19 11 61 83 3 158 20 11 1 53 75 2 142 NAm* 10 17 1 28 Ont* 6 8 5 19 SLR* 2 3 8 13 BW* 6 9 15 Total 55 1 232 283 12 583

Figure 6: Type of research occurring in Ontario based journal articles published between 1990 and 2012.

9 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario Figure 7: Percentage of journal articles published by research type addressing AIS in Ontario between 1990 and 2012.

The literature searches done with Scopus and Web of Science indicate that the majority of Ontario based AIS research is published in the Journal of Great Lakes Research (26%) followed by Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences (8%), Biological Invasions (7%), Aquatic Ecosystem Health and Management (4%), Canadian Field Naturalist (4%), and Hydrobiologia (4%). Author affiliations for each article indicate that the principle agencies/ organizations publishing AIS research in Ontario include OMNRF (14%), University of Toronto (13%), Ontario Ministry of the Environment (OMOE) (13%), University of Windsor (13%), Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) (10%) and York University (9%).

Overall survey findings Current research on aquatic invasive species in the province of Ontario is concentrated in the Great Lakes. For inland waters, most research has and continues to occur in Southern Ontario (FMZs 12 to 18) with no research occurring in the Far North. This geographic pattern aligns with the current distribution and patterns of arrival of AIS (i.e., Great Lakes) and the density of human population (both as a vector for spread, but also with respect to concern and reporting of AIS impacts). The absence of research in the Far North may reflect the low incidence of AIS in that region, whether real or perceived. Recent work applying DNA barcoding in Arctic ports may reveal the potential for AIS introduction via shipping and some of our first insights into AIS in the Far North (S. Adamowicz, University of Guelph; Chan et al. 2013). Taxonomically, research is moving away from dreissenid (zebra and quagga) mussels, but continues a trend seen since 2000 to focus on Bythotrephes and round goby. U.S. led research in the Great Lakes continues to emphasize dreissenid mussels impacts, and Ontario will benefit from these research findings as they make their way into the published literature. Much of the research on Bythotrephes is evaluating factors affecting the rate of spread among lakes, while much of the current research on round goby is in developing controls, and understanding impacts. Bythotrephes has well documented impacts on native zooplankton (Yan et al. 2002; Strecker and Arnott 2008, 2010) with cascading effects on fish communities (Strecker et al. 2011). The species continues to spread through central and eastern Ontario, with recreational boating and angling seen as a primary vector (Gertzen and Leung 2011; Yan et al. 2011). For round gobies, the species has had marked impacts on benthic invertebrates and fishes (Balshine et al. 2005; Barton et al. 2005), including predation on eggs and young of ecological and economically important fish species (Fitzsimons et al. 2006). As the species continue to expand its range, research led by the University of Windsor is striving to develop an integrated control strategy using both pheromones (Corkum et al. 2008) and sound (Rollo and Higgs 2008) as attractants to lure round gobies into traps (Kasurak et al. 2012). While such a trapping control program is not designed to eradicate the species, it would allow researchers to locally deplete populations of round gobies in critical habitats at critical times of the year (B. Zielinski, University of Windsor,

10 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario NSERC strategic grant). Bloody red shrimp is an emerging species of research interest based on interviews, with results just now making their way into the published literature. A two to three year lag is not unusual for research to move from “field activity” to publication. As a new species, most of the research on the bloody red shrimp is directed towards impacts (Ricciardi et al. 2012; Yuille et al. 2012) and early detection (e.g., eDNA: C. Wilson, OMNR; NextGen sequencing: D. Heath, University of Windsor). Past research tended to be more “reactive” by focussing on impacts including basic biology and understanding the species’ ecological role in invaded waterways. Current research is becoming more “proactive”, addressing topics such as early detection, rapid response, and risk assessments. This shift is likely driven by government mandates to prevent high-risk invaders from entering Ontario aquatic ecosystems. Past research on early detection of AIS focussed on the first record of the species, its distribution, biology, and impacts in the new environment, as exemplified by zebra and quagga mussels research in the 1990s (Mackie 1991, May and Marsden 1992). More recent research combines tools for early detection (e.g., see above and Briski et al. 2011) with risk assessments to understand the likelihood of arrival and establishment (e.g., B. Leung, McGill University and N. Yan, York University). Meta-analyses, habitat suitability, and ecological niche models (Ellis and MacIsaac 2009; Bailey et al. 2009; Muirhead et al. 2011) and policy evaluation (e.g., Bailey et al. 2011; A. Smith and N. Yan, York University) have become central components of this more proactive research direction. The Centre for Expertise on Aquatic Risk Assessment (www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/coe-cde/ceara/index-eng.htm) and the Canadian Aquatic Invasive Species Network (www.caisn.ca) are significant research nodes for research into early detection, rapid response, and risk assessment of AIS in Ontario.

Future recommendations We are confident our efforts have captured the current primary research on AIS in Ontario. However, since this compendium was initiated, new research has started, reinforcing the need to conduct a periodic scan of the research community to document current/active work. As revealed during the interviews, most research projects include multiple investigators, often representing several institutions. This observation is important in two ways: first, the highly collaborative nature of AIS research means most research activity can be identified (at least at a high level) through a limited number of contacts, but also, that smaller research projects may be missed until they are published. While we attempted to identify both large and small research projects, there are almost certainly some projects we missed, although we expect these to be of more limited geographic or taxonomic scope as they did not surface through our multi-faceted search (experts, networks, and publication scans). In addition, we did not attempt to capture U.S. or international research that could be informative to AIS concerns in Ontario. For example, considerable research is currently targeting Asian carp in the U.S. Midwest—including detection, control methods, impacts, and policy development. While the threat of an Asian carp invasion to Ontario is real, and the impacts could be profound, our analyses captured only the research currently underway in Ontario. Our literature review revealed how the terminology used to describe AIS has changed through time, reinforcing the careful consideration of the search terms used. Older citations in the Web of Science and Scopus databases did not have the same quality of keywords associated with the records, and often did not contain terms synonymous with invasive species in their titles, requiring searches to be based on specific taxa rather than a more inclusive topic. Subtle differences in search terms generated unique results, prompting us to use a large set of key words, wild card terms (e.g., invas*), and synonyms (i.e., exotic, invasive, non-indigenous, non-native, etc.). One potentially valuable tool that was not developed within this compendium would be to undertake a network analysis to identify research collaborations, funding sources, and the potential inter-relatedness of smaller projects which are working towards a larger goal. Network diagrams showing researcher, organism, geographic unit, or research type as nodes, with lines showing linkages would provide a helpful visual to understand the working relationships between projects, organizations, and individuals. The ideal compendia would feature an interactive, online database. If maintained and updated, the compendia would then serve as a project inventory with the ability to search certain species, topics, geographic locations, researchers, and organizations. To the research community, the compendium may facilitate research collaborations, and identify possible efficiencies with respect to data sharing and collaborative field work by

11 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario identifying what research is currently underway for different species in different regions of the province. For the general public, the compendium could be linked to existing websites, adding background on biology and impacts by species. This would allow individuals to search by species and/or geographic area to learn which AIS are already present as well as those posing a threat to their local ecosystem. This may elevate public interest in the threat posed by AIS, as well as to tie in with current public outreach programs such as the Invasive Species Hotline and various web based or social media resources. Overall, our results show a large number of research projects on AIS are currently underway in Ontario, that the bulk of that research occurs in the Great Lakes, and that impacts of the “usual suspects” (i.e., dreissenids, Bythotrephes, round goby) continue to dominate. Recently, research has expanded to include more and new taxa, more research in the north, and new disciplines such as risk assessment and early detection suggesting a shift to more proactive rather than reactive science needs.

References Bailey, S.A., L.A. Velez-Espino, O.E. Johannsson, M.A. Koops, and C.J. Wiley. 2009. Estimating establishment probabilities of Cladocera introduced at low density: an evaluation of the proposed ballast water discharge standards. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 66, 261–276. Bailey, S.A., M.G. Deneau, L. Jean, C.J. Wiley, B. Leung and H.J. MacIsaac. 2011. Evaluating efficacy of an environmental policy to prevent biological invasions. Envir. Sci. Tech. 45–2554–2561. Balshine, S., A. Verma, V. Chant and T. Theysmeyer. 2005. Competitive interactions between round gobies and logperch. J. Great Lakes Res. 31, 68–77. Barton, D.R., R.A. Johnson, L. Campbell, J. Petruniak and M. Patterson. 2005. Effects of round gobies (Neogobius melanostomus) on dreissenid mussels and other invertebrates in eastern Lake Erie, 2002–2004. J. Great Lakes Res. 31, 252–261. Briski, E., M. Cristescu, S.A. Bailey and H. MacIsaac. 2011. Use of DNA barcoding to detect invertebrate invasive species from diapausing eggs. Biol. Invasions 13, 1325–1340. Chan, F.T., S.A. Bailey, C. Wiley, and H.J. MacIsaac. 2013. Relative risk assessment for ballast-mediated invasions at Canadian Arctic ports. Biol. Invasions 15, 295–308. Corkum, L.D., B. Meunier, M. Moscicki, B.S. Zielinski and A.P. Scott. 2008. Behavioural response of female round goby (Neogobius melanostomus) to putative steroidal pheromones. Behaviour 145, 1347–1365 Ellis, S. and H.J. MacIsaac. 2009. Salinity tolerance of Great Lakes’ invaders. Freshwater Biol. 54:77–89 Fitzsimons, J., B. Williston, and G. Williston. 2006. Laboratory estimates of salmonidae egg predation by round goby (Neogobius melanostomus), sculpin (Cottus cognatus and C. bairdii) and crayfish Orconectes( propinquus). J. Great Lakes Res. 32, 227–241. Gertzen, E.L. and B. Leung. 2011. Predicting the spread of invasive species in an uncertain world: accommodating multiple vectors and gaps in temporal and spatial data for Bythotrephes longimanus. Biol. Invasions 13, 2433– 2444. Kasurak, A.V., B.S. Zielinski, and D.M. Higgs. 2012. Reproductive status influences multisensory integration responses in female round gobies, Neogobius melanostomus. Anim. Behav. 83, 1179–1185. Mackie G. L. 1991. Biology of the exotic zebra mussel, Dreissena polymorpha, in relation to native bivalves and its potential impact in Lake St Clair. Hydrobiologia 219, 251–268. May, B. and J.E. Marsden. 1992. Genetic identification and implications of another invasive species of Dreissenid Mussel in the Great Lakes. Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 49, 1501–1506. Muirhead, J.R., M.A. Lewis and H.J. MacIsaac. 2011. Prediction and error in multi-stage models for spread of aquatic non-indigenous species. Divers. Distrib. 17, 323–332. Ricciardi, A., S. Avlijas and J. Marty. 2012. Forecasting the ecological impacts of the Hemimysis anomala invasion in North America: Lessons from other freshwater mysid introductions. J. Great Lakes Res. 38, 7–12.

12 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario Rollo, A. and D. Higgs. 2008. Differential acoustic response specificity and directionality in the round goby, Neogobius melanostomus. Anim. Behav. 75, 1903–1912. Strecker, A.L. and S.E. Arnott. 2008. Invasive predator, Bythotrephes, has varied effects on ecosystem function in freshwater lakes. Ecosystems 11, 490–503. Strecker, A.L. and S.E. Arnott. 2010. Complex interactions between regional dispersal of native taxa and an invasive species. Ecology 91, 1035–1047. Strecker, A.L., B.E. Beisner, S.E. Arnott, A.M. Paterson, J.G. Winter, O.E. Johannsson and N.D. Yan. 2011. Direct and indirect effects of an invasive planktonic predator on pelagic food webs. Limnology and Oceanography 56, 179–192. Yan, N.D., R. Girard and S. Boudreau. 2002. An introduced invertebrate predator (Bythotrephes) reduces zooplankton species. Ecology Letters. 5, 481–485. Yan, N.D., B. Leung, M. Lewis and S. Peacor. 2011. Shifting invertebrate zooplanktivores: watershed-level replacement of the native Leptodora by the non-indigenous Bythotrephes in Canadian Shield Lakes. Biol. Invasions 13, 115–123. Yuille, M. J., T.B. Johnson, S.E. Arnott and L.M. Campbell. 2012. Hemimysis anomala in Lake Ontario food webs: Stable isotope analysis of nearshore communities. Journal of Great Lakes Res. 38, 86–92.

13 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario Appendix A

Questions / Data fields associated with Invasive Species Compendium Survey 1. Project Title? • please provide a one line title for your project 2. What organization do you work under? • please provide name of organization, university or business (i.e. MNR, Queen’s University) 3. Who is the lead contact on this project? • please provide full contact information (phone, fax, email, etc.) 4. What percentage of your time/effort focuses on invasive species research? • provide some idea of how intensely the research focuses on invasive species, or if studying invasive species was a consequence of another research interest (i.e., studying ecotoxicology led to research on zebra mussels) 5. What species or pathway is under investigation? • state all areas under investigation 6. What is the project timeline? • start and end date, end date may be open. 7. What is the budget and funding sources of the project? • trying to get a scope of the project (funding source, direct and in-kind, etc.) 8. Do you work with any partner organizations? • please give organization and contact, what role does the partner have? 9. What would you consider the project type? • research? monitoring? control? • for research, is it risk assessment, early detection, dispersal, impact, policy, etc. 10. Where is your main research focus? • field? lab? literature review? modelling? get idea of the work being done. 11. Where is the geographic focus of the project? • state area of focus (i.e., province wide, Lake Ontario, Cootes Paradise, etc.) 12. What are the program objectives? 13. What are the program deliverables? 14. Abstract / summary available? 15. Do you have a website that describes on your research program (could be broader than just this project)? • give URL 16. Are there any publications available on your project? • journal or popular press • intending to publish on this project?

14 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario Appendix B

Table B.1: Organizational acronyms used in this report

Acronym Definition ARMS Aquatic Research and Monitoring Section BB Biodiversity Branch DFO Fisheries and Oceans Canada EC Environment Canada ESF College of Environmental Science and Forestry FWSB Fish and Wildlife Service Branch GLERL Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory IB Information Branch IJC International Joint Commission MTO Ministry of Transportation Ontario NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration OFAH Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters OMNRF Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Forestry OMOE Ontario Ministry of the Environment PB Policy Division SIB Science and Information Branch SUNY The State University of New York TC Transport Canada TRCA Toronto and Region Conservation Authority U of T University of Toronto US EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency USGS United States Geological Survey

15 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario Appendix C

Figure C.1: Fisheries Management Zones (FMZ) of Ontario were used to classify geographic location of the current research projects in Ontario. Map courtesy of OMNRF website. http://www.mnr.gov.on.ca/en/Business/ LetsFish/2ColumnSubPage/198481.html

16 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario Appendix D

Table D.1: Researchers from Ontario, by organization, who were contacted and those who were interviewed.

Organization Last Name First Name Contacted Interviewed Algoma University Imre Istvan Yes Carleton University Lapointe Nick Yes Yes DFO – Burlington Bailey Sarah Yes Yes Bowen Kelly Yes Yes

Drake Andrew Yes Yes Koops Marten Yes Yes Mandrak Nick Yes Yes

Morris Todd Yes Yes Rennie Mike Yes Yes Environment Canada—Burlington Crowe Allan Yes Yes International Joint Commission Burrows Mark Yes Yes McGill University Leung Brian Yes Yes McMaster University Balshine Sigal Yes OMNR—Aquatic Research and Dunlop Erin Yes Yes Monitoring Section Evans David Yes Yes

Johnson Tim Yes Yes Johnston Tom Yes Yes Middel Trevor Yes Yes

Reid Scott Yes Yes Wilson Chris Yes Yes OMNR—Science and Information Friesen Trevor Yes Yes Branch Haxton Tim Yes Yes OMNR—Southern Region Weisz Erika Yes Yes OMOE—Environmental Palmer Michelle Yes Yes Monitoring Paterson Andrew Yes and Reporting Branch Rusak Jim Yes Somers Keith Yes Queens University Arnottt Shelley Yes Yes St Lawrence River Institute Marty Jerome Yes Yes Trent University Fox Michael Yes Yes Freeland Joanna Yes Yes

Sager Eric Yes Yes University of Guelph Adamowiczs Sarah Yes Yes McLaughlin Robert University of Toronto Collins Nicholas Yes Jackson Donald Sprules Gary Yes Yes University of Windsor Corkum Lynda Yes Yes Heath Daniel Yes Yes

Higgs Dennis Yes Yes MacIsaac Hugh Yes Yes Zielinki Barbara Yes Yes Upper Canada College Hamr Premek Yes Yes Waterloo University Barton David Yes Cuddington Kim Yes York University Yan Norman Yes Yes

17 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario Table D.2: Individuals from Ontario, by organization, who were initially contacted but were not conducting AIS research in Ontario. * indicates individuals who were interviewed, but whose work was deemed monitoring and assessment of AIS in Ontario.

Organization Last Name First Name AIS Monitoring in Ontario but not in Ontario Research No AIS work No AIS work in Organization but No AIS work No reply Lead contact or not longer Retired working in the organization Algoma University Antunes Pedro Yes Conservation Pearson Don Yes Ontario Rich Leslie Yes DFO—Burlington Christie Gavin Yes Cudmore Becky Yes

Dermott Ron Yes Johannsson Ora Yes DFO / TC Wiley Chris Yes EC de Lafontaine Yves Yes Lakehead U. Lee Peter Yes McGill University Ricciardi Anthony Yes MTO Vandenbosch Ray Yes OFAH Monfette Sophie Yes OMNR—ARMS Ridgway Mark Yes OMNR—BB MacDonald Francine Yes OMNR—FWRD Greenwood * Susan Yes MacDougall Tom Yes OMNR—IB Borwick Jason Yes OMNR - Carr Natasha Yes Northwest Jackson* Brian Yes Region Vandenbroeck John Yes OMNR—PD Copplestone David Yes OMNR—Science Gillis Mark Yes and Kitts Wendy Yes Information Mosindy* Tom Yes OMNR—Southern Heaton* Mark Yes Region Simpson Holly Yes OMOE Howell* Todd Yes Winter Jennifer Yes

Young* Joelle Yes Ontario Power Threader* Ron Yes Generation Van Oostrom Tony Yes Weller Wayne Yes Ontario Streams Laxton* Dayna Yes Pritchard Christine Yes RNT Consulting Claudi* Renata Yes TRCA Tu Christine Yes U of T Wells Mathew Yes U of Windsor Fisk Aaron Yes Wilfrid Laurier U. McGeer Jim Yes

18 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario Table D.3: U.S. individuals, by organization, who were sent a copy of the survey questionnaire by email. Only those persons who responded were confirmed to be conducting AIS research in Ontario or the Great Lakes. Survey Organization Last Name First Name Contacted Survey sent responded Cornell University Mills Edward Yes Yes Gannon University Andraso Gregory Yes Yes Great Ships Initiative Cangelosi Allegra Yes Yes Michigan State University Peacor Scott D Yes Yes New York Sea Grant MacNeil Dave Yes Yes

Smith Lane Yes Yes NOAA/GLERL Mason Doran Yes

Stow Craig Yes Yes Yes Vanderploeg Henry A. Yes St Lawrence University Baldwin Brad Yes Yes Stony Brook University Padilla Dianna Yes Yes SUNY—The College at Brockport Haynes James Yes Yes SUNY—Oneonta Horvath Thomas Yes Yes SUNY—Buffalo State College Pennuto Chris Yes Yes SUNY—ESF Schulz Kimberly Yes Yes Univeristy of Notre Dame Lodge David Yes Yes Univeristy of Toledo Bossenbroek Jonathan Yes Yes

Bridgeman Thomas Yes Yes Mayer Christine Yes Yes Stepien Carol Yes Yes University of Vermont Marsden Ellen Yes Yes US EPA—Region 5 Murphy Elizabeth Yes Yes

Schardt James Yes Yes Tuchman Marc Yes Yes USGS—Great Lakes Science Center Allen Jeffrey Yes Yes

Davis Bruce M. Yes Yes Dittman Dawn E. Yes Yes

Kennedy Gregory Yes Yes Schloesser Don W. Yes Yes Warner David Yes Yes USGS—Hammond Bay Biological Johnson Nicholas Yes Yes Yes Station USGS—Lake Erie Biological Station Kocovsky Patrick Yes Yes Yes USGS—Lake Ontario Biological Station Lantry Brian Yes Yes

Walsh Maureen Yes Yes Weidel Brian Yes West Virginia University Welsh Amy Yes Yes

19 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario Table D.4: U.S. individuals by organization who were contacted but were not conducting research in AIS in Ontario.

Organization Last Name First Name No AIS work but not in Research Ontario or not longer Retired working in the organization New York State Museum Molloy Daniel Yes NOAA/GLERL Reid David Yes SUNY—Oneonta Harman Willard Yes US Fish and Wildlife—Virginia MacLean Donald Yes French John R.P. Yes USGS—Great Lakes Science Center Madenjian Charles P. Yes USGS—Lake Michigan Ecological Research Pavlovic Noel B. Yes Gorman Owen T. Yes USGS—Lake Superior Biological Station Fahnenstiel Gary L Yes

Table D.5: U.S. individuals conducting research on AIS in Ontario that were identified from conference abstracts. * indicates individuals that were identified as conducting research in the initial contact list. Organization Last Name First Name Central Michigan University Uzarski Donald Cornell University Biological Field Station Rudstam Lars Illinois-Indiana Sea Grant, Purdue University Foley Carolyn Loyola University Chicago Keller Reuben Marrone Bio Innovations Dow Sarahann New York State Museum, Field Research Laboratory Mayer Denise NOAA / GLERL Rutherford Edward SUNY—Buffalo State College Burlakova Lyubov

Karatayev Alexander

Perez-Fuentetaja Alicia SUNY—College of Environmental Science and Forestry Farrell John SUNY—Oswego Welsh Amy University of Minnesota Mesinger Allen University of Toledo Devanna Kristen

Mayer* Christine

Stepien* Carol University of Florida Center for Aquatic and Invasive Plants Netherland Michael USGS—Great Lakes Science Center Bunnell David USGS—Columbia Environmental Research Center Chapman Duane USGS—Western Fisheries Research Center Adams Noah

20 Compendium of research on aquatic invasive species in Ontario ISBN: 978-1-4606-4104-0

July 2014

View publication stats